Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert park tunnels heritage values

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 Delete --JForget 23:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Albert park tunnels heritage values[edit]

User:Angel of music seems unwilling to accept that there is a difference between an article and a student essay. This article is a rearguard action to try and preserve stuff removed from the Albert Park tunnels article. It is simply a POV student essay. There are a few facts but Wrights Hill Fortress, Cracroft Caverns, North Head, and Stony Batter are already well covered here. Certainly there is nothing that needs to be merged back to Albert Park tunnels. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and unPOV it, include summary on main article TALKIN PIE EATER REVIEW ME 15:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note - currently the article is very POV --T-rex 16:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Albert Park tunnels are worthy of an article, but no need for two articles, and effort required to convert from essay to article is better spent on the main one.-gadfium 20:49, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Values are subjective and therefore this material at this title will always be POV. There is nothing here that can't be treated encyclopedically at Albert Park tunnels. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 21:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concurrently, all text under the header "Heritage values" should be deleted as unsourced POV. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 21:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete OR and not needed given that there's also an article on the tunnels. Nick Dowling (talk) 22:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't seem necessary given the main page. --Helenalex (talk) 03:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. POV essay adds nothing significant to the Albert Park tunnels article. There were lots of bomb shelters in WW2. Edison (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Copyvio. Much of the text has come directly from this journal. Gwinva (talk) 05:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per gadfium and Cumulus Clouds Goldfinger820 (talk) 22:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Copyvio — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:35, 4 July 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.