Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elgar's Special Survey


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. Not clear from ANI discussion whether SK#2 applies here, so regular (non-speedy) keep by week-long consensus. (non-admin closure) czar   &middot;   &middot;  20:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Elgar&
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No notability asserted, this page is basically a description of a small piece of land with no indication why it matters. UnrepentantTaco (talk) 18:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC) [Edit reverted as per WP:BE and. Unscintillating (talk) 02:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)]
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:20, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, I was able to find and add a couple of extra sources quite easily to the article. Further sources that look interesting but that I do not have immediate access to are "Rural village to urban surge" by Frederick Bradshaw which mentions it a few times, These volumes of the Victorian Historical Magazine, and quite a few mentions that come up in Trove newspapers.  I contend that this volume of sustained coverage over more than a century meets the WP:GNG.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:14, 16 June 2013 (UTC).
 * Keep: Coverage from a long time ago till now. Historical and notable. SL93 (talk) 23:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes GNG. Yet another Straight to AfD without a PROD. One of several disruptive AfDs by the same nominator. Dolovis (talk) 02:37, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy close, speedy keep: The nominator was blocked as of 06:52, 21 June 2013 for sock puppetry per a discussion "Disruptive creation of groundless AFDs, probable sockpuppetry". Also, removed nominator's vote inside of nomination. Crtew (talk) 16:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:SK 2a The closer should keep in mind the large number of nominations made on a large, diverse set of articles that the nominator made on the same day.Crtew (talk) 05:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy close, speedy keep. Discussed in numerous books on the history of Melbourne, since it had a lasting effect on the geography of the city. -- 203.171.197.13 (talk) 09:49, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.