Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estepona Golf Club


 * 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   delete. Wizardman 05:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Estepona Golf Club

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No assertion of notability. Ironholds (talk) 22:43, 14 November 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:19, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Assertion of notability is a CSD criterion; it has nothing to do with AfD. (Here, one is asked to prove notability.) Before we consider that, though, is a golf club not a geographical location?— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  22:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not using the precise wording required. There is no proof of notability, then. No, golf clubs are most certainly not geographical locations - see the guideline itself. If it were to cover golf clubs of all things it could conceivably cover every business and company known to mankind - after all, they have physical locations too. This is ignoring the fact that the geographical locations guideline is a dormant, decrepit proposal for a guideline which never came into effect. Ironholds (talk) 00:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm. If golf clubs aren't geographical locations, then I should think we're heading for a delete, since I haven't found any reliable sources either. I do want to speak out in defence of the "dormant, decrepit proposal" about geographical locations, though.  First, it's not a proposal for a guideline, a fully fledged guideline, or even a policy: it goes much deeper than that.  See the first pillar: Wikipedia is more than just an encyclopaedia.  It's also a gazetteer.  Which is why there's a convention, when dealing with geographical locations, that the Ordnance Survey and its international equivalents count as reliable sources and automatically establish the subject's notability where it's marked on the map. But we can't have a rule that says everything marked on an official map is notable, or we'd have articles on individual farms, so on further reflection I think I'm in the delete camp.— S Marshall   Talk / Cont  01:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually the guidelines have almost always stated that while atlases, OS and the like are reliable sources for verifiability purposes, they should not be for reliability. Otherwise you have situations where every road, park, footpath, fire station etc are worthy of an article. Ironholds (talk) 15:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 20:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions.  -- - 2/0 (cont.) 03:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ( X! ·  talk )  · @137  · 02:17, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No third party sources. No inherent notability. Miami33139 (talk) 23:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Not notability, most of text has been copy and pasted from here:, it has an overtly promotional tone and a guidebook style table. Grim23</b> ★ 05:24, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Both copyright and also just not notable. It qualifies as speedy too Cynof  G  avuf 11:23, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, no evidence of notability. Golf courses aren't communities or major geographical features.  Nyttend (talk) 20:02, 5 December 2009 (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.