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 merged. Discussion about the place has moved to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daya Bay. Kusma (討論) 17:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ling Ao[edit]

No assertion of notability Ideogram 10:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It asserts that it is a place. I thought it was a village, and all villages are notable. However, I can't find evidence (after searching in Chinese for 岭澳) that anything exists there other than the Ling'ao nuclear power plants. I suggest we redirect this to Daya Bay (Guangdong), the article about the other two nuclear power plants located just 1km from the Ling'ao power plants. Kusma (討論) 10:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That article links to a nice googlemaps picture where you can see four nuclear reactors; two of them are the Daya Bay plants, the other two are the Ling'ao plants. Kusma (討論) 10:33, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Four nuclear reactors would make any place notable. Someone should clean it up. --Selket ^Talk 00:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need to rationalize this article, "Daya Bay (Guangdong)", "Daya Bay", and "Guangdong Nuclear Power Station" (a redirect). Since the only thing notable about these locations are the Nuclear power plants, I suggest we combine all the information into Daya Bay Nuclear Power Plant. --Ideogram 09:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I'm not even sure that there is a place called Ling Ao. All I could verify was that the nuclear power plant is called Ling'ao; I guess we could merge everything into Daya Bay, which is clearly a verifiable location. Kusma (討論) 20:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather have just one article on the nuclear power plant installation and not have one for the location at all. --Ideogram 20:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with either as long as redirects exist. Kusma (討論) 21:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell there is no name for the collection of all four nuclear power plants. So I guess I will have to create two articles, Daya Bay Nuclear Power Plant and Ling Ao Nuclear Power Plant, as linked to by Daya Bay Reactor Neutrino Experiment, which appears to be the reason for this little constellation of articles. Any objections? --Ideogram 15:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. Kusma (討論) 15:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge complete. Closing admin, please delete Daya Bay. --Ideogram 17:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why? If you create an AfD for it, please add my keep vote "real location of four nuclear reactors" to the AfD. Kusma (討論) 17:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we agreed to keep only one of the articles, either the location or the power plant. And as far as I can tell, the Ling Ao NPP is not located on Daya Bay. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ideogram (talk • contribs) 17:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The two reactors are only 1100 m apart and apparently the bay is called Daya Bay. Kusma (討論) 17:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And there's a historic fortress on the bay, too. Kusma (討論) 17:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well put it in the article. It would be nice if you can get some reliable sources indicating why that fortress is historic. --Ideogram 17:34, 19 February 2007 (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.