Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of interesting Google Maps satellite images

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was - moved to userspace - SimonP 02:27, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

List of interesting Google Maps satellite images
Wikipedia is not a&hellip; catalogue of interesting aerial views of the US? --W(t) 05:49, 2005 May 29 (UTC)
 * Relegate to a user page. This is an incredibly cool page, but alas it is neither encyclopedic, nor very neutral (interesting is a value judgement).  My commendation, however, to the compiler.  It's quite interesting.  -SocratesJedi | Talk 06:56, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename to something like "List of Notable Aerial Images" and include links to other aeriel views, not just Google. -CunningLinguist 06:59, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Notable according to what criteria? -- Cyrius|&#9998; 23:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or, for the sake of reaching a veredict, concur with CunningLinguist. --Sn0wflake 07:47, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep concur with CunningLinguist. Klonimus 08:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this is a interesting page. NSR 08:31, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the title and content is opinionated. Userfy. Mgm|(talk) 10:41, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge into Google Maps. - SimonP 15:48, May 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keepsta - it is da bomb page. it is da coolest thing in da hood these days, homies.
 * Move to a user page per SocratesJedi. platypeanArchcow 16:52, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Can be expanded to include Canada and elsewhere. Notable subject matter as the Google Aerial Photos/Maps have become an Internet phenomenon of late. If there is a Google Maps article, make sure it's well linked, but I don't see a need to merge as someone would probably suggest spinning the list off into its own article anyway. The list certainly needs expansion. If the title is at issue, simply rename it, though it should still be specifically identified as Google Maps images. 23skidoo 18:51, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to user space as it isn't encyclopaedic. Hedley 19:15, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy. This is cool, but not very encyclopedic. Sarg 19:19, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Why give Google any more free advertising?  Kaibabsquirrel 20:13, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Userpagify Kinda cool though. Fawcett5 20:48, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy if at all possible; otherwise rename to something less POV. -- BD2412 talk 20:57, 2005 May 29 (UTC)


 * Userfy and delete. Cool, but not encyclopedic. Denni &#9775; 00:18, 2005 May 30 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is encyclopedia and not link farm. Pavel Vozenilek 00:37, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep expand to include Canada and other places Revolución 04:13, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment not second vote. Use the °N, °W template to add the coordinates given in the link to individual articles (google up a decimal to dms converter). I already did so for Hoover Dam as an example how to do it. Fawcett5 04:27, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy and Delete. Would make a damned cool personal web page, but it's not an encyclopedia article.  I like it a lot.  It belongs, but not here.  -- Un  focused  04:30, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This page is defunct - sites like perljam and google sightseeing are doing a much better job - why not just link there from the Google Maps page?
 * Userfy. However cool, an article whose concept is basically one person's notion of what's interesting is fundamentally not encyclopedic. carmeld1 19:07, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy. -- RHaworth 19:49, 2005 May 31 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect - move site links to Google Maps, Aerial photograph, and similar pages, delete individual image links. akaDruid 07:57, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete (original research as to what is 'interesting'), or move to user-space. James F. (talk) 09:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keepthis page, it's informing and interesting
 * Userfy or delete - not an encyclopedia article, original research. Just being "cool" isn't a reason to keep opinion pieces. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 23:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy, user can decide whether to delete it. &mdash; Asbestos | Talk  23:57, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: We should be sure to remove the link at Google Maps if and when this page is userified/deleted/etc. -SocratesJedi | Talk 00:04, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this is not encylopedic and interesting is completly subjective. Vegaswikian 06:14, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * STRONG KEEP - This page is valuable in many ways, and is a good example of how great wikipedia can be. Maybe change title to reflect something less POV --The_stuart 18:51, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a good example of how people will vote to keep anything, even pages that are just "I like these pictures". The page violates "no original research", it violates verifiability (define interesting), it violates "not mere collections of external links" (WP:NOT), it certainly violates the spirit of "not collections of photographs with no text to go with the articles", violates "not lists or repositories of loosely associated topics", and could even be interpreted as violating "not travel guides". People rail about arguments like "not notable" not being allowed reasons for deletion, but this time, it's the people voting keep that are ignoring the written rules. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 19:59, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --Horseman 20:04, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Reasoning? -SocratesJedi | Talk 00:44, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - it is a list of places where satellite imagery is most interesting (whether Google provided the images or not) and as such may well end up being named and classified as such, but surely it needs to be kept - Bevo 15:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy - I created this page when its contents had made Google Maps painfully bloated. I'd proposed that the list wasn't appropriate in the article namespace but a separate article was the compromise instead.  I'll volunteer to put it in my userpage if that's what the vote result is here... -Joshuapaquin 16:55, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.