The result was delete. Very weak arguments for retention amounting to an WP:ITEXISTS argument. The five pillars argument fails to emphasis the word "incorporating" in the quotation, which is not a term meaning that Wikipedia should have all of everything. Lacking a policy argument, the consensus here is to delete - a merge would be, as several commentators indicate, pointless as there is nothing to merge from this article Fritzpoll ( talk) 16:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC) reply
The place to which this article relates is not a village, as the article asserts, but a small place within a village. It is not shown on many online mapping services, and only appears on Ordnance Survey maps at the same significance as farms and woods or common land. It has no specific notability in its own right because of any events or notable people. ClickRick ( talk) 20:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was delete. Very weak arguments for retention amounting to an WP:ITEXISTS argument. The five pillars argument fails to emphasis the word "incorporating" in the quotation, which is not a term meaning that Wikipedia should have all of everything. Lacking a policy argument, the consensus here is to delete - a merge would be, as several commentators indicate, pointless as there is nothing to merge from this article Fritzpoll ( talk) 16:38, 3 July 2009 (UTC) reply
The place to which this article relates is not a village, as the article asserts, but a small place within a village. It is not shown on many online mapping services, and only appears on Ordnance Survey maps at the same significance as farms and woods or common land. It has no specific notability in its own right because of any events or notable people. ClickRick ( talk) 20:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC) reply