- 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. Mr.Z-man 08:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}. |
Contested prod. Non notable student residence. Nuttah68 (talk) 18:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete building without historical or cultural significance. No reliable sources. i kan reed (talk) 19:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Without this, the list of halls of residence of the University of Bristol would be incomplete. - Mgm|(talk) 23:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- q and dropping a non-notable building making a list of halls of residence at a University be incomplete is a bad thing because... ? If there isn't extensive coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject, then it fails WP:N... Pete.Hurd (talk) 07:10, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - your mum Roflcopter176 (talk) 18:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - Delitionists can get a bit carried away sometimes Francium12 (talk) 23:51, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment This does not explain why it should be an article. I don't mind if there's a reason to keep the article, but "people who want to delete it are irrational" does not sound like a legitimate reason. i kan reed (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - Chill out. It's only an ecyclopedia 137.222.229.74 (talk) 18:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. All the references are self-published - which makes it non-notable.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 00:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- 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.