Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psilalonia Square

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 Merge. Lara ❤Love 01:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Psilalonia Square

It's a town square and doesn't appear to be a notable one in English (although that at least confirms existence) or Greek, where its existence is only confirmed in wiki mirrors. This article is nothing more than an unsourced travel guide and without evidence of notability , there's nothing with which to improve it. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 02:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. -- ~ Eóin (talk) 02:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. It has no sources, but sounds authentic enough. Badly written - happy to reconsider my vote though. Fattyjwoods ^{(Push my button)} 03:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Perhaps its Greek name is Πλατεία Ψηλαλώνια, but I'm not sure. There's a reference to its fountain at a travel website with that "spelling" [1]. --Oakshade (talk) 06:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Could be, I e-mailed an off-wiki friend from Greece to see if she can shed any insight. It's either a bad spelling in both languages or an extrememly non-notable town square as even my undergraduate college quad gets more ghits TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 13:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. One can get additional Google hits by searching for "Psila Alonia" (which is how the name is spelled/transliterated in our article Patras). No opinion at this time on whether the square is notable enough for an article. Deor (talk) 16:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Geographic locations, and especially public ones, are inherently notable, although this one appears to be a borderline case.--Berig (talk) 17:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment where is that? I know towns are notable, but I've never seen any inherent notability for town squares. That's stretching the definition of a geographic location since town squares are essentially man-made constructs due to the development of commerce around one particular area TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 17:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said that it's a borderline case, but even fountains, have articles here and the article claims that Psialonia square has both a monument and a fountain in addition to other things.--Berig (talk) 18:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh ok, thought you said there was inherent notability. My mistake. With regard to other stuff, that's neither here nor there. We can't verify the claims because we can barely prove it exists. Just don't think it's a notable square. We'll see where this goes. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 23:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, no one has added any references, or pictures, so I retract my keep vote.--Berig (talk) 16:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Locobot (talk) 01:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 07:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. —Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 07:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I relisted this since I think further discussion is needed but won't formally weigh in with a !vote. We do have a photo of this place and perhaps the editor who uploaded it, User:Curunvir, could shed more light on the importance or non-importance of this square. The problem seems to be a lack of English language sources for this place, at least on the internet. I can't help but wonder though how this square compares with, say, Grand Army Plaza in my own neighborhood (a pretty small patch of land, but one which it's easy to find sources for) or the far less notable Sherman Square (also in NYC, though I'd never heard of it even though I've been at 72nd and Broadway at least a hundred times). It would be good to hear from some editors who work on Greece-related articles and/or editors with some knowledge of our general approach to notable public spaces in notable cities (which Patras certainly is). I would also point out that we do have a category called Streets and squares in Patras which lists several other squares including Georgiou I Square and Olga Square. All of these articles were created by User:Pumpie who was informed of this AfD but has not signed in since April 20th.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 07:52, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
'keep' - this link has a rather instructive plan from google earth - I think the square's probably not very notable from an architectural point of view, but from an urban design and planning point of view, it's clearly one of the bigger public spaces in a city whose grain at that point is pretty dense. --Joopercoopers (talk) 11:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge either to Patras or the appropriate neighborhood article (I couldn't figure out which one it was). According to the current proposed form of WP:NPT, "A neighborhood or sub-section of a city/town/village should be incorporated in the article about the town or city it is located in, unless it has exceptional notability of its own.", notability is not established as anything beyond a part of a city. It begins to encroach on travel guide type information, but not to any extremes, it is (generally) giving detail, not advice. -Verdatum (talk) 19:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the article on the city/neighbourhood, until we have evidence of independent notability. There's nothing much wrong with this article at the moment, except that it's just not clear that this is a particularly notable location. If it turns out it is, the article can always be un-merged later. Terraxos (talk) 00:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless citations from reliable sources are added to comply with the verifiability policy. Stifle (talk) 20:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the reasons summed up by Terraxos and Stifle. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:47, 8 May 2008 (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.