Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Redford Township Library
- 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The result was Withdrawn and Merge. I still think that TerriersFans was making a big deal over a small deal. Joe Chill (talk) 18:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redford Township Library (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can't find significant coverage for this library. Joe Chill (talk) 04:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge/redirect to Redford Township, Wayne County, Michigan. A mention of the public library is always worthwhile in a township page. This should have been considered before nomination. In addition to the primary sources, the key opening dates and present use of the old building can be verified here, construction details here, key facts on the collection here etc. None of these provide significant enough coverage to establish notability for its own page but it does allow a sourced section to be added to the township article. TerriersFan (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I searched for sources which shows that I met WP:BEFORE. WP:BEFORE is twisted around constantly. Joe Chill (talk) 15:56, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The relevant bullet point states "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD.". This wording has remained unchanged since July 2006. TerriersFan (talk) 16:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems like you're making a big deal over nothing. Joe Chill (talk) 16:47, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The relevant bullet point states "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD.". This wording has remained unchanged since July 2006. TerriersFan (talk) 16:32, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I searched for sources which shows that I met WP:BEFORE. WP:BEFORE is twisted around constantly. Joe Chill (talk) 15:56, 20 September 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.