Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Huntlee, New South Wales

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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:26, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Huntlee, New South Wales[edit]

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

Per WP:TNT. Laun chba ller 07:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:35, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why TNT? It looks like a real project of planned development, it is discussed in the Australian media [1]. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 07:36, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this article is not a mess, and is notable. --Greenmaven (talk) 10:56, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not disputing the article's notability - places are indisputable and are inherently notable. This article is an absolute tip, and I feel that blowing it up and starting again would be the best way forward.--Laun chba ller 12:42, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete, agree with WP:TNT when the place is established rather than just a planned place. Until then the article should be titled "Planned Development of Huntlee, New South Wales" --CutOffTies (talk) 15:40, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Change to keep, though I still think it should be moved to Planned Development... but that is not policy so I'm fine the way it is. Sorry for the noise. --CutOffTies (talk) 19:27, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So ... delete or move to "Planned Development of Huntlee, New South Wales"? Btw, WP:TNT states: "A page can be so hopelessly irreparable that the only solution is to blow it up and start over." It has nothing to do with an established or planned place. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 11:53, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - a notable topic that has received ongoing significant coverage in reliable sources. Some source examples include: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. Also, the article is in rather decent shape, so also opposed to deletion per WP:TNT. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:10, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Move to "Planned Development..." That seems to be a more appropriate title. Also, like Northamerica, I'm not entirely convinced this is a good case for TNT. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:04, 30 November 2013 (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.