Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GPS waypoints

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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 02:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GPS waypoints

A list of GPS waypoints of places in Wikipedia. Not encyclopaedic. r3m0t ^talk 21:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as useless/unencyclopedic. The individual articles can have the geographic locations. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-05 22:03Z
Delete as per above. Sliggy 22:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, we couldn't possibly list the coordinates of everything interesting. Rhobite 00:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per noms above - also, sounds like we have a geocaching fanatic editing Wikipedia. Cyde Weys _vote^talk 05:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure. Agree it is not encyclopediatic in current form (just a list). Perhaps content about GPS waypoints may make a worthy article. At least one of these waypoint was added to an existing article (Theodore Roosevelt Inaugural National Historic Site) -- I moved it to the "reference" section -- but (as I know nothing about GPS waypoints as a phenomenon) I don't know how encyclopediatic the GPS info is even within an article. — Eoghanacht ^talk 14:38, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rewrite and then see per Eoghanacht. I was about to rewrite it myself, but the best I could come up with was a dicdef so I didn't bother. Someone with more GPS expertise than I might be able to do something with it. Haikupoet 21:36, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we have templates such as {{coor d}} to add lat/long to articles. There is no need for this. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 23:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as hopeless listcruft. Stifle 13:17, 7 January 2006 (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.