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. Ryan Postlethwaite 22:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crime in South Australia[edit]

Crime in South Australia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

While this may be a valid topic for an article, as it stands this is not even convertible into a valid sub-stub and would need starting from scratch Mattinbgn\^talk 04:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 04:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Valid topic, article is in no shape to be kept. Merge any relevant information to Crime in Australia. Five Years 05:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Is just a random list of crimes. Expected an article about prevelance / causes / disusion of crime in Aus. This doesn't cut it.Yobmod (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Quick guide to blowins like me - it has three lines, one of which is a set of links to four other articles, and isn't even categorised. I'd say speedy per A1/A3. Orderinchaos 17:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. No valid reason for deletion was given. Lot's of great articles have suffered through such humble beginnings. Take for example Crime in Australia, it also started off as a bunch of links. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What in the article as it exists is encyclopedic and what would be kept if the article is expanded? -- Mattinbgn\^talk 20:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply It depends what you mean by "encyclopedic". If you mean something that is informative about a notable subject then everything in the article is encyclopedic. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A random list with nothing in common other than their geographical location with no context provided whatsoever is the opposite of encyclopedic. It is the definition of trivia. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 22:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge material into Crime in Australia, and redirect this page. Happyme22 (talk) 20:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, should be a no-context speedy. Fee Fi Foe Fum (talk) 10:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as contentless and contextless. There isn't even anything there to keep really. Ford MF (talk) 02:34, 30 June 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.