| Quicklinks |
|---|
| Other Excellent articles on CSD |
Original Article
"Drake-circus-bomb-shelter" On the night of 22 April 1941, during the the blitz, over 70 civilians were killed, including a mother and her six children, when a bomb fell on the shelter near the Planetarium. The bomb shelter consisted of a series of underground tunnels which many had long-presumed lost but were rediscovered in 2006. The bomb blast was so big that human remains were found in the tops of trees. In 2006 an appeal was made to raise money for a public sculpture to honour those who lost their lives. -portland Square memeorial Project- The university of plymouth commissioned a scuplture to commerorate the loss of those lives. -references- 1. [1] 2. [2] 3 [3]
NOTE: The references provided showed that Drake-circus-bomb-shelter was a legitimate cite and notable.
Nomination Criteria
A1
No context. Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." Context is different from content, treated in A3, below.
Deletion Options
| rationale | Count | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Agree with ratioinale to speedy delete. | 1 | 1.7 |
| Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but deletable by other criteria. | 1 | 1.7 |
| Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but this is a case where IAR applies. | 0 | 0 |
| Disagree with speedy deletion article makes claim to notability in as a unique historic cite from WWII. | 57 | 96.6 |
Survey Comments
| Common rationale | Count |
|---|---|
| PROD | 1 |
| CLEANUP | 4 |
- If it is notable, as shown by the sources, it's a valid stub.
- recommend the admin use the provided sources to add the bit of context missing
- has sources, prob notable
- If the sources really indicate notability, I'd re-work the article to clarify what it is.
- Having written this one's sister article, I can hardly not argue to keep it…
- looks like an unimportant site, but probably requires AFD
- Salvagable. Looks legit.
- should not be speedily deleted, none of the CSD apply.
- blatant example of error.
Balloonman's analysis
How this was deleted, I don't know. The deleting admin didn't even bother to check the article's references and then deleted it per A1---lack of context? And it was nominated for deletion by another editor? Speedy Deleting articles like this is what gives CSD'ers a bad name. It is clearly notable and even had sources to prove it!
BTW here are the references:
| Quicklinks |
|---|
| Other Excellent articles on CSD |
Original Article
"Drake-circus-bomb-shelter" On the night of 22 April 1941, during the the blitz, over 70 civilians were killed, including a mother and her six children, when a bomb fell on the shelter near the Planetarium. The bomb shelter consisted of a series of underground tunnels which many had long-presumed lost but were rediscovered in 2006. The bomb blast was so big that human remains were found in the tops of trees. In 2006 an appeal was made to raise money for a public sculpture to honour those who lost their lives. -portland Square memeorial Project- The university of plymouth commissioned a scuplture to commerorate the loss of those lives. -references- 1. [1] 2. [2] 3 [3]
NOTE: The references provided showed that Drake-circus-bomb-shelter was a legitimate cite and notable.
Nomination Criteria
A1
No context. Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." Context is different from content, treated in A3, below.
Deletion Options
| rationale | Count | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Agree with ratioinale to speedy delete. | 1 | 1.7 |
| Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but deletable by other criteria. | 1 | 1.7 |
| Disagree with rationale to speedy delete, but this is a case where IAR applies. | 0 | 0 |
| Disagree with speedy deletion article makes claim to notability in as a unique historic cite from WWII. | 57 | 96.6 |
Survey Comments
| Common rationale | Count |
|---|---|
| PROD | 1 |
| CLEANUP | 4 |
- If it is notable, as shown by the sources, it's a valid stub.
- recommend the admin use the provided sources to add the bit of context missing
- has sources, prob notable
- If the sources really indicate notability, I'd re-work the article to clarify what it is.
- Having written this one's sister article, I can hardly not argue to keep it…
- looks like an unimportant site, but probably requires AFD
- Salvagable. Looks legit.
- should not be speedily deleted, none of the CSD apply.
- blatant example of error.
Balloonman's analysis
How this was deleted, I don't know. The deleting admin didn't even bother to check the article's references and then deleted it per A1---lack of context? And it was nominated for deletion by another editor? Speedy Deleting articles like this is what gives CSD'ers a bad name. It is clearly notable and even had sources to prove it!
BTW here are the references: