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The result was speedy keep, as article has been completely rewritten since nomination and all deletes have been withdrawn. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cemetery of the Holy Rood (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

* Delete, This is nowhere near nuetral and cemetary is not notable. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 15:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Why is the article citing Wikipedia as a source? That is not third party.....IS this allowed?Hell in a Bucket (talk) 16:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been completely rewritten and is a quality article. I did not think this possible and again congratulate the person who managed it. Keep Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I'm working on this right now. I've deleted a significant amount of text that was either redundant with another Wikipedia article or a copyright violation of the cemetery's official website. I've also cleaned up some areas and removed POV. I have no comment on notability, which is what I think this discussion should focus on. I will be deleting the internal Wikipedia references momentarily. KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Wikipedia, or any other wiki, are excluded as sources, for hopefully obvious reasons. I am uncertain as to what would make a cemetery notable. Consider Forest Lawn Memorial Park (Hollywood Hills), for example - one of many cemeteries with articles. It has many famous bodies there. I don't know if that's what makes it notable, but it doesn't hurt. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - zero sources to indicate notability. Shereth 17:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • changed to Weak keep, meets criteria now. Shereth 20:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • If any resurrection occurred here, would it qualify as a Rood Awakening? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:37, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Mount Auburn Cemetery is surely notable, if only one is wondering who is paying Mary Baker Eddy's phone bill. PhGustaf (talk) 17:33, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Very weak keep per Molly Brown.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:37, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per improvements. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I pinged Shereth and Hellina - if they change their !votes, I can speedy keep it. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The article now has multiple references from a variety of independent sources, including two books, and articles from both the New York Times, and the New York Daily News. Note also that the list of notable burials there is now up to 14, all of whom have articles on Wikipedia. Voceditenore (talk) 19:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable interments - hence notable in itself as well. Collect (talk) 21:44, 17 June 2009 (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.