Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masjid Umar Leicester


 * 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, default to "keep". Jayjg (talk) 02:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Masjid Umar Leicester

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

no reason why this mosque is more deserving of an article then any other Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 18:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 21:26, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  --  Beloved  Freak  20:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions.  --  Beloved  Freak  20:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to Evington, creating a new section on places of worship and using the external links as referneces for the sentence. This is usually the best solution for churches, primary schools, local minor sporting clubs and the like.  Unfortunately the target article is rather a hotchpotch at present, and will need tidying up.  Peterkingiron (talk) 20:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete, no evidence of notability; if we merge, there's no reason that I couldn't create an article on every other religious group in the city and then merge it into the main article, and the resulting merges would violate Wikipedia isn't a directory. Nyttend (talk) 04:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Architecturally notable. Was shortlisted for a religious architecture award. I added some references. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment (voted above). The shortlisting is certainly grounds for not deleting out of hand, but this is likely to remain a short article, and my preference is still to merge it.  I have not livied in Leicester since I was a student over 35 years ago, and have no currrent personal knowledge of the area.  Peterkingiron (talk) 10:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * merge for the reasons set out above. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge since it has some third-party notability. Polarpanda (talk) 19:21, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The nomination provides no reason to delete - we have articles about numerous mosques and we have no special requirements for these.  There appears to have been no due diligence performed per our deletion policy - there isn't even a talk page for the article yet.  It is trivial work to find a substantial source which covers this topic in detail and I have added a citation to the article. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:58, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Google news only shows one result . It has won a notable award for its architecture, so the building is notable.   D r e a m Focus  13:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Our articles on mosques are uneven and easily need to be expanded. We aren't in a rush here so a stubby can sit until something notable is added by someone who actual knows what can be written and sourced. As to any merge suggestion I would add that a list of places of worship or a list of mosques would equally work if consensus pushes that teh article simply can't exist as is. -- Banj e  b oi   14:59, 25 January 2010 (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.