Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shirzel/Cris Craft Historic Homes Sites

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. JohnCD (talk) 16:58, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Shirzel/Cris Craft Historic Homes Sites

 * (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) North America1000 00:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * (Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) North America1000 00:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

A list of addresses. Wikipedia is not a directory Legacypac (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep . Historic homes are an obviously valid topic.  The page is valid notes related to the project.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:58, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not historic homes.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. While I agree, I think there's also a privacy concerns with just listing random people's homes without more information. The source itself (which isn't a copyright violation to just take) can be incorporated into a single sentence at Algonac, Michigan (I don't think this is related to Chris-Craft Industries which makes boats). There's no evidence that the individual homes are notable and I don't see where we create lists of "List of Historical home sites in city XX" (other than nationally recognized historic sites which these aren't it seems) so I don't see how this list could be a plausible draft. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * My reading of the information is that they are not random people's names, or even names of people who choose to live in publicly accessible historic homes, but of historic (long dead) people associated with the historic home. Historic homes take very little source to pass notability concerns, and collectively historic home are definitely notable.  I do see, if not a plausible draft, material in the form of notes for what the user is interested in exploring.  I don't think it is fair to judge the page as a draft article.
 * If, however, you do think there is any privacy concern, or that this is promotion of not-really-historic homes, then blank as inactive. Definitely though, the nomination rationale is not a reason to delete.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I can't even find the addresses from the source. The historical society shows pictures of boats which makes more sense and it is the same Christ-Craft Industries so I again can't find evidence of what is going on here. I'd be somewhat ok with blanking it but without any proof that these are accurate addresses and home listings, I'd say soft delete it and let the editor if they return, restore it. Again, there's nothing to even add into the city article since the source doesn't seem to confirm anything here. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:24, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Using google maps, you can look at the houses. They are not historic.  Maybe this is an address list of members of the society.
 * Delete. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:30, 19 April 2016 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.