Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharpitor


 * 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 REDIRECT. The history still exists if someone decides that any information should be merged at a later date, but the consensus is that there is none now. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; WER  14:24, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Sharpitor

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Stub, unnecessary List_of_Dartmoor_tors_and_hills is avaliable. Page gives no real information. Ecallow (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete this with fire! Because it's irrelevant! --AstronautAnt (talk) 20:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge to List of Dartmoor tors and hills. NorthAmerica1000 18:44, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. There is plenty of mention of this on google. Szzuk (talk) 17:09, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of the references aren't about the stone age site, but about Overbeck's: there are multiple Sharpitors.--Colapeninsula (talk) 13:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔  00:39, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 17:11, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Delete (possibly redirect). We cannot have an article on every archaeological site in UK: there are far too many.  I do not wholly understand the article, as a tor is natural rock outcropping at the top of a hill (usually on Dartmoor).  Megalithic normally refers to an archaeological structure made of very large stones, soemthing differnet from a tor.  Peterkingiron (talk) 20:20, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr  \ talk / 23:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Third relist &mdash; Usually we don't relist 3 times, and so far it looks like there's rough consensus against keeping; but, no clear policy-based arguments are being given, plus the direction of non-keepage is unclear. It seems like the primary policy-based argument is probably Wikipedia is not a directory, and it should be noted that stubs aren't inherently a violation of policy, nor is the relevance of the content; conversely, mentions on google aren't inherently reasons to keep. Please provide additional policy and guideline-based arguments or at least a clearer direction. -- slakr \ talk / 23:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge to List of Dartmoor tors and hills. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 00:21, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Dartmoor tors and hills, which already includes two Sharpitors and multiple Sharp Tors. The article refers to a site near one such Sharpitor. I can't find any reliable sources about a stone age site: just personal web pages and sites that publish user-submitted content. No evidence that there has been serious archaeological or historical analysis of the site, or in-depth coverage in reliable sources, or evidence that this is an official or widely-used name for the ruins. This site is not notable. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect - Multiple searches also failed to find anything significant enough for this article. The consensus seems to be that there isn't anything to add substance to the article. SwisterTwister   talk  22:04, 12 June 2014 (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.