Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Restoration candidates


 * 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. Wizardman 17:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Restoration candidates

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia is WP:NOT a resource for collectors of trivia. Mais oui! (talk) 07:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to the main article at Restoration (TV series) and trim out those which are not finalists (unless the candidates are notable on their own; but there are significant amounts of redlinks, which suggests otherwise). Yngvarr (c) 10:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep (or merge to main article if you like; I'm not fussed). Worthwhile article relating to a popular TV series that generated a lot of interest. The full list should be kept irrespective of whether the buildings currently have their own individual entries. Deleting articles like both diminishes Wikipedia and hacks off the valuable contributors who put in a lot of effort to create them. Why would anyone want to do that? 81.152.168.70 (talk) 12:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC).
 * Keep (or at the very least merge) The finalists are notable in their own rights (I remember that listed buildings are notable just for being listed; as all candidates were listed, and on the "at risk" register, I'd say they were definitely notable) - There is a case to include the full list in the article, but then it could become overbearing and need splitting out. -- Ratarsed (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  11:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  11:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - the programme was about notable buildings in urgent need of repair. Even being an initial candidate probably measn that a building is notable.  Furthermore, some have probably been repaired from other funding sources.  Peterkingiron (talk) 01:06, 27 March 2008 (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.