Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Towns In Gippsland, Australia


 * 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 categorize (seems to be finished, if not and you need the contents of this article, let me know). W.marsh 19:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Towns In Gippsland, Australia
There's not that many towns in Gippsland to fill an A-Z list. Would be better suited as a category. -- Longhair\talk 02:32, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy conversion to Category:Towns in Gippsland, Australia. Besides that, "in" is inappropriately capitalized. Shin'ou's TTV (Futaba|Masago|Kotobuki) 03:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. --Mysmartmouth 03:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Conversion to category seems to be the best option. I have fixed the spelling on some of the towns showing that we have articles on them so appropriate to categorise. If kept, should be renamed to Towns in Gippsland, Victoria. Capitalistroadster 03:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Capitalistroadster 03:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Convert to category The list is far from complete. But why would you bother? --Michael Johnson 04:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, it can be annotated to include population numbers and such, providing additional info a category can't. I do agree the current empty sections aren't working though. Should be renamed List of towns in Gippsland, Australia (Victoria isn't neccesarily a unique name). Mgm|(talk) 10:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Categorize, pointless as a list. Probably too small to make a decent list even if expanded with population numbers and such, so should be merged to Gippsland if that was the case. However, I don't see any expansion so that's out of the question. Punkmorten 10:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * convert to navbox. A list or navbox is useful for showing articles that do not exist (yet), so cannot appear in a category. See for example Towns of the Riverland. Incidentally, all the links should be of the form townname --Scott Davis Talk 14:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Convert per ScottDavis --Peta 05:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Since around the end of August, the list of town names has grown, but no information has been provided for any of the towns. Until we get more information on pages relating to the actual towns, the list is essentially valuless.  The list creator hasn't even added any information and seemed to be creating the list out of a sense of "completeness".  Although a couple other people may have been able to copy some names out of a phonebook, the page should be deleted, with the caveat that it can certainly be recreated once it can be something more than a valueless list of names.  There is no point in making the list into a category. Banaticus 07:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Since around the end of August, the list of town names has grown, but no information has been provided for any of the towns. Until we get more information on pages relating to the actual towns, the list is essentially valuless.  The list creator hasn't even added any information and seemed to be creating the list out of a sense of "completeness".  Although a couple other people may have been able to copy some names out of a phonebook, the page should be deleted, with the caveat that it can certainly be recreated once it can be something more than a valueless list of names.  There is no point in making the list into a category. Banaticus 07:46, 6 October 2006 (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.