Talk:London/Wembley

vfd discussion
Archived from the Project:Votes for deletion page:

Article about a football (soccer) stadium. Not a destination. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 19:54, 15 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Delete - (WT-en) Sapphire 21:31, 15 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep as a redirect page. -- (WT-en) Andrew H. (Sapphire) 20:51, 27 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Delete, an article about Wembley Stadium is not need for Wikivoyage. --(WT-en) Terence Ong 05:53, 16 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Delete nuh-nuh, naah, naah. hey, hey, heyy. Goood bye yie. (WT-en) OldPine 19:36, 17 October 2006 (EDT) Redirect to Wembley (and improve the Wembley article. (WT-en) OldPine 06:55, 30 October 2006 (EST)


 * Retain - Doesn't the stadium count as a desitnation in its own right, seeing as its size and importance are very big so far as attractions go? If there's a separate article about Disneyland, why not Wembley? Where exactly are we proposing to move the information too anyway? The article about London? 88.105.47.184 16:06, 19 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Take a close look at Project:What is an article?, we have never had a football stadium article and I am pretty sure it will not happen this time. That said, there are places where this information belongs and we would hope you would help with that. Also, if you don't like the policy about stadium's you would be welcomed to the talk page for what is an article? and open a discussion. The information in the article would likely go in the Wembley article (which has not been created yet). You could start that article and put all the information there and then link to it from various places including London. Hope this helps. One other thing... although not necessary, it would be good if you create an account and then it would be easy to communicate directly and put information on your talk page. Thanks! -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 07:17, 20 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Hey there. Apologies about the username, it was actually myself commenting, but I'd forgotten to sign in. I see where you're coming from, and moving the article to Wembley would be fine and is something we can do in the next couple of days if no-one else expresses an opion I suppose. Cheers. (WT-en) Victor Greenstreet 16:12, 21 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Update: Article merged and redirected to Wembley. (WT-en) Victor Greenstreet 15:57, 23 October 2006 (EDT)


 * Redirect to Wembley. redirects are cheap and search engines love them. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 09:24, 28 October 2006 (EDT)
 * Redirect to Wembley. -- (WT-en) Ryan 21:58, 28 October 2006 (EDT)
 * I'm not happy with this solution. The Wembley article is an outlier that appears not to fit into the well-developed London district structure.  Why should this not be subsumed in something that fits the structure and already exists? -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 23:39, 29 October 2006 (EST)
 * I'm not against your suggestion and agree that would be a good solution. What do you have in mind specifically? Is there a district where it fits? -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 07:15, 30 October 2006 (EST)
 * There is a consensus to redirect apparently, the argument now is just where to redirect to and whether to merge, so I'm archiving and the discussion can continue on the talk page. -- (WT-en) Ryan 20:26, 31 October 2006 (EST)