Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swallow Hill
Source: 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 delete. Wifione ....... Leave a message 13:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Swallow Hill
- Swallow Hill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not on the Ordnance Survey Eastleigh 9 (talk) 11:58, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have blocked User:Eastleigh 9 as a sock of User:Crouch, Swale. User:Crouch, Swale created the article. I guess that technically we could delete this AFD as CSD G5 and the article as G7 but perhaps that would not be the best approach :) nancy 16:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:38, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Seems to fail notability: not every name on a map requires an encyclopedia article. Also speedyable as noted above, since created by blocked or banned user, as well as because the author requests deletion. Edison (talk) 21:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete one of numerous place articles started by this user because it is marked on a map, not because it is notable.--J3Mrs (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Just an area, not a actual place.--Antwerpen Synagoge (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2011 (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.