Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ceduna Waters

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ceduna Waters[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An undeveloped property with no indication of importance or notability beyond projected local impact, one article in local paper JNW (talk) 13:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 15:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Perhaps worth a mention in Ceduna but doesn't justify it's own article. --Pontificalibus (talk) 16:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - agree, no indication of notability. JohnCD (talk) 22:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Usually even quite established estates don't have their own articles, unless they're gazetted as a suburb. Orderinchaos 15:55, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am the author of the article. I'm happy for it to be deleted on the basis that the title redirects to the Ceduna article. While it may not seem important to some people, it is the biggest development in Ceduna for many years! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajhshamley (talk • contribs) 02:11, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The standard is whether it meets Wikipedia guidelines for notability; its inclusion in the town's article is similarly questionable, per WP:NOT#NEWS, WP:LOCAL. And please sign your talk page comments. JNW (talk) 02:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And it's probably not a good idea to redirect the article while its deletion is still under discussion. I've reverted your edit. JNW (talk) 02:22, 15 October 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.