Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coachwood Park wyandotte, MI

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 no consensus. After being relisted twice with no clear consensus determinable, the article is defaulted to keep. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 02:30, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coachwood Park wyandotte, MI

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

Appears to be a completely non notable public park. PROD declined by article creator. Safiel (talk) 17:46, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this was part of a long and chaotic incident on the New pages feed. A student group kept making articles for non-notable parks. But anyway, this should be deleted as not notable. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 18:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No doubt related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knights of Columbus Tot Lot, Wyandotte Mi. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:07, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Wyandotte,_Michigan#Sports_and_recreation where the other ones are now located. The list there could do with some shortening to remove duplication like the alcohol and rollerblades ban. But while none of these small parks articles are worthy of standalone pages, per WP:GEOLAND they can be a credible addition to the broader article on the town. -- Euryalus (talk) 00:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect, certainly not independently notable. SwisterTwister talk 05:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: If more information were available in the article, this park would meet the WP:GEOLAND criteria as a named geographical location. However, given that only basic statistics are provided in the article, I suggest deletion. There's not much information to merge into Wyandotte,_Michigan, except that it exists, so I'd also recommend against merging --- from looking at the park on Google Maps, it appears to be only one of many parks in Wyandotte. OtterAM (talk) 18:18, 6 May 2016 (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.