Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Traditional counties of England and Wales by highest point


 * 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 keep. Mailer Diablo 07:45, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

List of Traditional counties of England and Wales by highest point
This is part Owain campaign to create the Traditional Counties. He seem to be campaigning on behalf of the likes of County Watch and Association of British Counties, his objectives are to give his pervert ideas the same coverage in Wikipedia as the actual counties of the UK IanDavies 11:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: IanDavies is a sockpuppet of banned User:Irate and so shouldn't be editing, let along nominating anything for deletion - David Gerard 15:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination and Wikipedia is not a soapbox. &mdash;ERcheck @ 13:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC) Changing vote to Abstain . There is already a List of English counties by highest point, which seems to follow the  official boundaries.  However, per Ruby, this may be of interest to highpointers.  The nominator and Owain seem to have a history ("pervert"=personal attack), so POV is not clear.   &mdash;ERcheck @ 14:47, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep This is a resource for Highpointing in the UK (which see). The hobby/sport requires an agreed-upon division of boundaries to establish which hills or mountains in a geographical area are the highest within each subdivided locale. I'm astonished at the failure to assume good faith here.  Ruby 13:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment We do assume good faith, initially. But when that good faith is repeatedly abused then it becomes reasonable to assume that a User is acting in bad faith.--Mais oui! 14:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination and Wikipedia is not a soapbox. --Mais oui! 14:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, good list. --Ter e nce Ong 14:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Pov article. Designed as PR.--IanDavies 14:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Issue is strongly debated, with no consensus found as yet - it would be wrong to delete before a consensus is found. The fact there is a debate at all, never mind how long it has gone on for, shows this is not a simple case, and that there is a body of editors who support this article.  If the article is to be labelled POV, so could its deletion be equally POV. Aquilina 16:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as useful to some people, although rename to List of traditional counties of England and Wales by highest point (with small 'T'). This article treats traditional counties simply as geographical regions, which is consistent with both common usage and Wikipedia conventions. — sjorford (talk)  19:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep verifiable geographic areas Jcuk 19:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ruby... and, "pervert ideas"? Huh? —rodii 19:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. OK, this is obviously spillover from the giant flame war at Traditional counties of England, and I think we're way past questions of good faith here. rodii


 * Keep per a mild eventualist inkling that this will eventually be merged into something more useful.  young  american  (talk) [[Image:Flag of West Virginia.svg|25px|  ]] [[Image:Flag of Wales (1959–present).svg|25px|  ]] 20:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Astrotrain 20:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Many people in the UK, while not pushing for a return to the traditional counties, do think of them as convenient geographic areas as they find the ever changing administrative areas confusing to think about. I'm still a Yorkshireman as I was born there, whatever the administrative areas. --Bduke 21:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Bduke and others.It's not replacing a similar list by current administrative areas, it's supplementing it. Grutness...wha?  00:26, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ruby. Arbustoo 01:17, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per most other people, though I would probably prefer to England and Wales seperated. Grinner 10:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep seems properly referenced and useful. Carlossuarez46 22:29, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep User:IanDavies and User:Mais oui! have been systematically trying to remove references to traditional counties from Wikipedia and engaging in personal attacks. IanDavies has already been banned and Mais oui! doesn't seem to want to discuss anything, but engage in constant revert wars. Owain (talk) 10:01, 15 February 2006 (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.