Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vault Beach


 * 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 as per consensus. Non-admin closure. Warrah (talk) 00:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Vault Beach

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Stub, unreferenced article written like a travel guide - which wikipedia is not. Simple Bob (talk) 08:44, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Geographical features like this are generally notable. Per the book link provided by the nom, there is significant coverage too.   More here. --Oakshade (talk) 17:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep'. Geological features are inherently notable. SYSS Mouse (talk) 18:29, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It is always better to preserve content than to delete it, and the topic of this article does indeed seem to be a topic worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. Intelligent  sium  00:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Either Keep or Merge with Mevagissey. I am not sure that we can have an article on every beach or cove.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:48, 12 March 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.