Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weedon Pinkney Priory

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. (non-admin closure) Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:10, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weedon Pinkney Priory

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very little information on page and lacking references Willbb234 (talk) 12:39, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 June 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:53, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. 94rain ^Talk 13:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Neither of nom's two statements are reasons for deletion, as notability is determined by what is in the world, not what's on Wikipedia. However, Weedon Pinkney priory has very substantial coverage at British History Online and there's more at the local council. Some of the history, with fine images which could be uploaded to Commons can be viewed at the King's College Cambridge website. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Too short or no references are not reasons for deletion. If the topic fails the criteria under WP:GNG and WP:NGEO both, it might be deleted. It meets GNG with significant coverage from sources given above. --94rain ^Talk 13:38, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge the article with a relevant and important article. I think, the article subject could remain in another Wikipedia article by merging.Forest90 (talk) 13:47, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per first two above. --Doncram (talk) 15:28, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:22, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:22, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:22, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think it was also called Weedon Lois or Weedon Loys Priory, searching those terms gives a few results as well. Smmurphy^(Talk) 13:53, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I believe we have articles on all English medieval monasteries. We may need redirects from the alternative names. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Article has references, so nominator's reasoning is fatally flawed. Needing improvement is not a reason to delete an article. Mjroots (talk) 19:32, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Chiswick Chap, British History Online is a tertiary source and there is quite a bit about it. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:42, 8 June 2019 (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.