Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baldwins Gardens

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Baldwins Gardens

[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)

Fails WP:GNG, only source is primary. Google has few hits and the ones that exist are not secondary/reliable. Rs chen 7754 18:51, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and United Kingdom. Rs chen 7754 18:51, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — this user is attempting to delete multiple streets at the moment, seemingly unsuccessfully from the discussions. WP:BEFORE is recommended. —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 23:28, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The above does not explain the road's notability. The road is a single block less than 200 m long – London has a lot of streets dating back hundreds of years, but they do not necessarily need their own articles, and my search likewise does not establish notability. Reywas92^Talk 03:00, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. Narrow residential street. Could only find passing mentions. gidonb (talk) 00:28, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to keep per James500. The street is still narrow and residential but the coverage he found is impressive. Thank you, James500! gidonb (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Satisfies GNG. Baldwins Gardens has received significant coverage in many reliable independent books. [For the avoidance of doubt: Although the article refers to the 17th century, Baldwin's Gardens (note the apostrophe which is sometimes used), formerly called Baldwin's Rents, is said to have been built in 1589: [1].] James500 (talk) 12:31, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:15, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sources found sufficient to meet WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable in the 17th century as one of few debtors' sanctuaries in London/Middlesex and specifically listed in an Act of Parliament. WP:NTEMP applies. Sources sufficient to pass GNG. The article can be further expanded with more recent history. Rupples (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable for various reasons. Also the Site of the Central School of the National Society for Promoting Religious Education in the early 19th century. TSventon (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2023 (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.