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 Redirect to Dalgety Bay. Found no valid content to merge. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 03:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dalgety Bay Parish Church

[edit]

Non notable, no secondary sources and I think we're being trolled by the user. See [1], regardless, I'll let you all handle it. Here is a link to his other nom for deletion [2] and then there's this [3]. Drunken Pirate (talk) 08:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Dalgety Bay HeartofaDog (talk) 12:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Tell's you about a church. Tharnton345 (talk) 13:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The problem with your statement is that you have no knowledge about Wikipedia policies. Please keep in mind that this is a discussion to establish a consensus, not a vote. Please include sources or anything else that would make this church notable and people might decide to keep it. Tavix (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a non-notable church. Nothing has happened here to make it more notable then the billions of other churches across the world. Tavix (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It was opened in 1962 by Queen Elizabeth II. Tharnton345 (talk) 19:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where is your proof of this? The year it opened has nothing to do with notability unless it is a historical site for example. Tavix (talk) 20:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sadly, it does not appear to be notable. I'm sure it'a fun place though... but Wikipedia is not a church directory.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:25, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - lacks the sources to meet WP:N and doesn't seem a significant landmark or tourist attraction. TerriersFan (talk) 21:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to Dalgety Bay. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Dalgety Bay: that article (largely historical) indicates that it was a new town. The church was evidently built as part of the community facilities of the new town. The church does not deserve an article of its own, but would make a good start for an expansion of the town article to show what it is like today. As with primary schools, I think this will be generally be a good solution for the church articles that frequently come up for AFD. Peterkingiron (talk) 09:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Dalgety Bay may have a new town, but it is not entirely a new town... --MacRusgail (talk) 13:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Dalgety Bay.--MacRusgail (talk) 13:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the times of their services are of no interest to anyone outside a 5 mile radius. definitely not notable. Toyokuni3 (talk) 03:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - trivial coverage. PhilKnight (talk) 18:15, 10 August 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.