Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Wind Wand


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 02:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The Wind Wand

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

non notable structure of undefined purpose Wuh  Wuz  Dat  18:06, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable Public sculpture. I've added four references - plenty more out there.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  19:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - plenty of sources for notability, and it doesn't have to have a purpose, it's Art! JohnCD (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article could use a good expansion, but the sources that have been added prove there are reliable sources out there that could lead to such an expansion. Deletion wouldn't be at all appropriate. —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  20:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Who cares what it's for, the sources are good and the simplest of searches shows some more. Cheers to WSC. ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 20:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Per above, gSearch comes up with a lot of usable material.  fetch  comms  ☛ 21:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passes WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 21:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep significant both as local landmark and work of notable artist. No problem with sourcing. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  22:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:N. Art is its defined purpose.--Oakshade (talk) 15:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - appears to qualify for inclusion, as it is evident that there are sufficient significant, reliable, non-trivial third-party coverage. Passes notability guidelines.   Cocytus   [»talk«]  01:56, 21 December 2009 (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.