Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wheathills


 * 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   delete. I'll be happy to restore the article if an editor is interested in merging the content. Regards,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 21:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Wheathills

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Prod contested by article's author, who wrote in the edit summary, "Object to deletion, this took 6 months to research BECAUSE there are no web references to it; I placed the references to this piece with the original article but they were deleted." The "references" that the author included (which can be seen at the bottom of this version of the article) seem to suggest that most of the information was derived from personal communications, making the article essentially unverifiable original research. I can find no evidence of substantive treatment of this structure in published sources (save for the Web site of the company that now occupies it, which I don't believe to be a reliable source). Deor (talk) 11:55, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:44, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, as original research by author's own admission. Alternatively, could we transwiki this to Wikiversity? Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 17:50, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete The author's inability to find published references, on the web or elsewhere, is pretty damning evidence of the article's non-notability. All I could find are passing mentions of a plantation by the name in some books about hunting, and I'm not even sure that's the same Wheathills as this one. Looks like a run-of-the-mill farm to me. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 18:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, and Chris Neville-Smith (as primary research) and TheCatalyst31 (as unverifiable). If someone can find paper resources, that would be acceptable, too. Bearian (talk) 21:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, apparently not a listed building so not notable enough to be of interest to WP:HSITES. Any verifiable info could be merged into the Mackworth article. Mjroots (talk) 21:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I've updated the article to include an image, the co ords are attached to the image; updated with reference the previous occupiers; updated Present Day section with references to amongst others magazine articles and a notable Public Body (SPAB) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickydav (talk • contribs) 14:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge to Mackworth. The majority of this article detailing the history of the building is still unverifiable and doesn't belong on Wikipedia. However, as Wheathills seems to have appeared on two TV programmes (I'll take your word that it was on Flog It), it seems reasonable for the Mackworth article to mention this place exists and what TV shows it was on. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 16:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - would appear, dispite the work done on it to be non notable, happy for it to be userfied so that Chris Neville-Smith's merge suggestion can happen, but unlikely search term and likely to be a term that could need to be re-used later. Codf1977 (talk) 11:45, 20 July 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.