Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quayside

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 close. This AfD should not be here at all and seems to be a magnet for socks/meatpuppets. I don't like to throw AGF out the window but I have to apply WP:DUCK in this instance. If the article has problems, then by all means repair them - but no valid rationale for deletion is being presented whatsoever and this appears to be more of a convoluted move request. Shereth 14:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quayside (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Article does not represent the global meaning and is very confusing. The term Quayside appears to be adopted by those on Tyneside. //Melonite (talk) 11:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• speedy keep. Not a proper deletion rational per the wp:deletion policy. MickMacNee (talk) 11:53, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Article biased to those only on Tyneside and does not represent the global meaning Quayside (side of quay). BigDaveo (talk) 12:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quaysides was the same nominator, who seems to be denying that xe is making AFD nominations. Xe was also the nominator at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sage Gateshead. And the above contribution by BigDaveo (talk · contribs), as well as some suspect edits in both accounts' edit histories, is prompting me to start a sockpuppet check. Use of sockpuppets at AFD is a no-no. Uncle G (talk) 12:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• DELETE Article serves no general purpose or is it notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HobbieIP (talk • contribs) 12:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC) — HobbieIP (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Note:user's second edit
• Delete. Article most definitely does not give a global representation. No place in Newcastle is officially called Quayside, Newcastle is a river side ___location but no Quay. Leiflemke (talk) 12:58, 22 June 2009 (UTC) — Leiflemke (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Keep and move. A notable part of North East England. Can't it be moved to Quayside, Newcastle, or similar? The fact the "article does not represent the global meaning" is not really a vaild reason to delete the article. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 13:05, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (1) I am concerned about sock-puppetry. Most of the people arguing to delete seem to be merely repeating or paraphrasing the nominator's original assertion. I would encourage people to read all comments rather than just counting numbers of deletes or keeps. Other than these fake "votes" it seems there are no people arguing to delete. (2) The people arguing to delete have not given any sources (or discussed the lack thereof) to back up their view. (3) I am finding numerous sources: [1]. Yes, the word "quayside" also has other meanings...but it appears this region is highly notable and is often referred to as "quayside". The proper way to solve this is by a disambiguation message, not a deletion discussion. Cazort (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • Note: No one is sock puppeting. And I challenge anyone to prove otherwise. //Melonite —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melonite (talk • contribs) 13:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to Newcastle Quayside which is what it seems to be called. Drawn Some (talk) 14:00, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • So what happens to Quayside then? MickMacNee (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turn it into a generic stub? Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 14:47, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was tried, but without references, it is hard to make it look like anything other than a dictionary definition, which we don't create articles for. Anyway, none of this debate even resembles a valid reason for deletion, so I've requested a speedy closure at wp:ANI before it gets silly. MickMacNee (talk) 14:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • Newcastle Quayside is a better name than what I suggested above. Arriva436^{talk/contribs} 14:47, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:02, 22 June 2009 (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.