Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Byrnes Cove
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 09:34, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Byrnes Cove (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article does not warrant its own page, Should be placed in Sport section of the Kilkee article. ShaneMc2010 16:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Possible Merge with the Kilkee article, however only if re-written to fit. Hillabear10 (talk) 17:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:39, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —JmaJeremy✆✎ 04:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep. Did anyone try Google at all? I found it threw up a few things, and I put them into the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.201.194 (talk) 01:45, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I have removed the unreliable sources and uncovered statement added by IP. Without the still present exaggeration, nothing usefull will be left. The Banner talk 03:27, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WilyD 06:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
LöschenDont know if this counts due to the fact it has been nominated by me, but this article in my opinion should be deleted. ShaneMc2010 15:25, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]- No, doesn't count. It is pretty clear that a nominator votes for removal, so it is double voting. The Banner talk 17:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Generally geographic features are notable, and it appears this is a real place recognized in reliable sources and at least regionally. Monty845 17:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- A Google search revealed just over 2400 hits, most about holidayhomes. Knowing this place personally, I would not say that is warrants its own article. At best, it should be merged with the article about Kilkee. The Banner talk 19:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.