Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Parish Church of St Mary, Potton


 * 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 --Haemo 18:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The Parish Church of St Mary, Potton

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Individual Catholic church that is not notable in the scope of this encyclopedia Rackabello 18:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Rackabello is completely correct, as i can find no reason that this particular church should be noted in wiki.!paradigm! 18:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)!paradigm!
 * This article should stay. The article is about a Church of England church, not a Catholic Church. Potton is a town and as such the principal town of a town is entitled to a wikipedia article.  It is very in depth and worht reading. It is too big for the Potton Article so it deserves a page of its own.Franny-K 19:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This article should stay. I found it to be very informative.  It is no less notable than other articles.  Indeed I can think of several articles that are less notable, for instance articles about obscure academics.  This is a strong vot in favour of the article. 84.65.163.253 20:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason to keep. Smashville 19:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There is a Potton article that appears to be largely identical. I would think that any church with that history would be notable. Outside references would help. MarkBul 20:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * However...I agree with this...Keep or Merge per above...sometimes something is notable just by how long it has been in existence. The fact that this church has been around for 700 years is notable in and of itself. Smashville 21:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with Potton as above Fosnez 20:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep but tidy up, and remove duplicated material from Potton. Ancient church (also listed building) is notable in itself. -- MightyWarrior 22:58, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to the main article giving the current form. Yes there is lots of historical significance but no sources really accompanies the info, so difficult to give it a pass per WP:V unless sources are added. Right, parts of it can be merged for now or someone can store it in a sub-userpage until the sources are provided to assert its notability. I see it can be notable though--JForget 00:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Mbisanz 07:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The church has a very long and notable history, this makes it notable. It is also a very thorough and well researched article and is too big to be part of the Potton Page. 62.172.110.194 09:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  15:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletions.   -- Fayenatic (talk) 06:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC) (UTC)
 * Keep but totally rewrite copvio. I have added an assertion of notability - it is a Grade I listed building which places it in the top 1.4% of the most important historic buildings in England. However the whole article was copyvio from and subsequent pages. In fact, I'll be bold and delete the copyvio now. DWaterson 12:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - now done. The article has been converted to a one-line stub, which I suppose can now be speedily kept. DWaterson 12:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - also, the page should be moved to Church of St Mary, Potton when this AFD is closed (assuming it is kept). DWaterson 12:41, 14 September 2007 (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.