Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pillar of Shame

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 Keep Article needs a lot of work, it's start-class at best, but topic is notable enough. --++Lar: t/c 04:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pillar of Shame[edit]

(I added this just because of standard procedure. I hope to clear this ridiculous AfD formally. I am not the one who propose this AfD.)--Spring Dennis 05:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am the creator of this article. May I know what is the reason to put this article in AfD? Please explain for any AfD propose! --Spring Dennis 05:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep maybe get rid of some more irrelevant sutff towards the bottom to make more consise SM247 06:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I can't determine notability in this case. Could someone with a bit more expertise in this area of statues please comment on whether this is notable or not? DarthVad e r 07:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it seems to have some degree of notability and cultural significance per the article. GassyGuy 08:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per GassyGuy. A quick google search seems to bear out its notability. Fluit 18:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep appears to be notable. Eluchil404 02:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and perhaps mark as "needs work". There are now five, not four; the external link gives good information about the subject. --EricTalevich 11:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - no reason to delete --Hunter 12:07, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the language could be improved, POV made more neutral, and some comments about the origin of the phrase 'pillar of shame' (who coined it ? is it a translation of a chinese phrase ? etc) --Heysan 00:56, 13 June 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.