Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle Point, Victoria
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 Speedy keep per consensus. Non-admin closure. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 05:22, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Eagle Point, Victoria (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)
Lacks sources of demographics and tourism, also causes information to be inaccurate because there are no citations. Eyesnore (pending changes) 03:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Why was this nominated for deletion less than three hours after its creation? [1] --Oakshade (talk) 04:22, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. All settlements are notable, and this one can be verified. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Sources are easily found, (I'll add some later), but lack of refs does not make information inaccurate.--Dmol (talk) 04:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep as the nom has given no proper rationale for deletion. Currently not being sourced is a case for article improvement, not deletion. --Oakshade (talk) 04:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep per Oakshade above. And per Eastmain, verified populated settlements are considered notable. Stalwart111 05:36, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep: Localities are inherently notable. --LauraHale (talk) 06:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep Nomination rationale is not cause for deletion. --99of9 (talk) 02:25, 14 February 2013 (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.