Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kulim Lake Garden


 * 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   no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. For the record, I would have punched this on the 14th and not have made a 3d relist. Since the only 2 "keep" !voters have not addressed the issue of notability, I'm closing this NC. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Kulim Lake Garden

 * – ( View AfD View log )

fails WP:GNG. not all parks are notable. nothing in gnews ]. run of the mill park and unreferenced. LibStar (talk) 07:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:13, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  02:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  05:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 14.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  17:58, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - After more than two three silent weeks there pretty clearly there is no taste among AfD participants for a purge of unsourced articles on parks. Is Wikipedia better off with or without this? The former, I think. Carrite (talk) 08:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep IMO, this should have been procedurally closed after seven days, WP:NPASR.  Now that it has sat here this long, a Keep is proper as a speedy renomination is not now in order.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * comment none of these keep votes address how a notability guideline is met. If I prodded this, this would have been deleted. LibStar (talk) 01:53, 17 February 2012 (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.