Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K-Town, Chicago


 * 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 of the debate was redirect to North Lawndale, Chicago - it's already been merged. - ulayiti (talk)  11:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

K-Town, Chicago
NN, D. ComCat 00:31, 4 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep Usefull entry --Pypex 01:04, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. Cynicism addict 00:51, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless you want to tell us WHY it's notable. howcheng   [ t &#149; c &#149; w &#149;  e  ] 01:11, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Howard, it's up to those of us who want stuff deleted to explain why. "Delete" is not the default option. --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 02:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Err, I actually meant the remarks towards the article creator, not the nominator. When I cast my vote, the article was basically "K-Town is a bunch of streets in Chicago starting with the letter K," making no assertion of notability, or whether that term was used widely beyond that area, or even what significance the term has. To me, that's almost A1 material. My attitude towards AFD has always been to consider the merits of the article as it is written. If the article were to be improved (and it has), I'm more than willing to change my vote, which I'm doing now. Keep after rewrite. -- howcheng  [ t &#149; c &#149; w &#149;  e  ] 07:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Assuming your addressing me, I didn't say it was notable, I said it was usefully. But then "I haven't heard of it" is not really a good test of notability.--Pypex 01:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep See this entry in "The Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago © 2005 Chicago Historical Society." It's a real name, there's a vaguely interesting historical explanation&mdash;it is a fragment of an unfinished systematic street naming plan&mdash;and it is not the case (as I unjustly suspected) that there are A-Towns, B-Towns, C-Towns, etc. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC) P. S. Or could merge and redirect somewhere suitable, but I'm not sure where. Too much detail for inclusion in Chicago, Illinois, not really enough to stand on its own as a whole article... do we have an article on Neighborhoods of Chicago? Dpbsmith (talk) 01:36, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Changing vote to Merge and Redirect to North Lawndale, Chicago. I've already performed the "merge." Dpbsmith (talk).
 * Dammit, I was about to do that! Merge and redirect to North Lawndale, Chicago as per Dpbsmith. Meelar (talk) 01:42, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Maybe we can have a fight about it? We could play "three-revert chicken." Dpbsmith (talk) 01:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * (By the way, K-Town is a dab and I changed the relevant link in that page from K-Town, Chicago to North Lawndale, Chicago) Dpbsmith (talk) 02:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Great work (again), Dpbsmith. Stop showing off! fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 02:05, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep.
 * (Unsigned vote by User:Trever Dpbsmith (talk) 02:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Merge and redirect per Dpbsmith - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] 09:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect as per Dpbsmith. By the way, Comcat, could you please explain your nominations more so that we can understand the reason behind your nomination. Nn D does not provide us with much information to go off. Capitalistroadster 02:41, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. It's important enough for the Chicago Historical Society to include, it's important enough for us in some fashion. --  user:zanimum
 * Delete or merge, as above. Pintele Yid 04:07, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep interesting article.--Nicodemus75 04:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as a section of the North Lawndale article. That's how other neighborhoods in Chicago are handled, as sections within their respective community area articles.  Excellent work.  Tedernst 06:14, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep in North Lawndale article, with redirect. Gazpacho 07:16, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with north Lawndale, Chicago. Neighborhoods are okay to include, but this article doesn't stand much chance of getting any bigger. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:16, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - Merge into North Lawndale per above. -- NS LE  ( Commu nicate! ) < Contribs > 08:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Keep or merge. and please excuse my overt n00b-ism. There's a lot more that can be said about this area, actually, and once I get my feet under me here I'll be happy to work on it.--208.246.213.149 15:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)IAmGladys 15:21, 4 November 2005 (UTC)(that was me...sorry)
 * Keep NN K. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 16:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Dpbsmith.--Isotope23 20:51, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge per Sjakkalle. -Haon 23:37, 4 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Merge per Sjakkalle --LBMixPro(Speak on it!) 01:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment The information in this article has already been merged with North Lawndale, Chicago and expanded. So I think that all the votes for "merge," "redirect," and "merge and redirect" all amount to the same thing, i.e. replace the contents of this article with #REDIRECT North Lawndale, Chicago Dpbsmith (talk) 02:22, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, and redirect to North Lawndale, Chicago. I'm all for keeping neighborhoods within cities... but neighborhoods within neighborhoods?Gateman1997 23:28, 7 November 2005 (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.