Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lae International Hotel
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 speedy redirect , if such a thing exists. The article has already been merged and redirected, and no one seems to disagree with this, so this AfD is somewhat pointless at this point. (non-admin closure) —SW— chat 16:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lae International Hotel
Non-notable three star hotel. illogicalpie(take a slice) 18:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. As the nom said, this appears to be a non-notable three-star hotel, despite the statement in the text of the article in wikipedia's voice that it is "an important conference centre". It exists, but its coverage appears to be generally trivial passing mention. It has wood floors, it has wooden furniture, it has four luxury suites, and it has two restaurants. Sounds run-of-the-mill, non-notable to me. I PRODed it, but the PROD was removed by the article creator.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Close as moot has already been merged into Lae, which is probably what should have been done rather than AfD StarM 01:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Or in lieu of PROD removal? Obviously, given the PROD, PROD removal (accompanied by an edit summary stating: "Take it to AFD if you think its non notable"), nomination here, and subsequent redirect by the editor who suggested that this AfD be started if editors thought the subject non-notable, this was not a non-contentious merge prospect, as editors had differing views as to whether it should be a stand-alone article.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 15:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 15:50, 17 January 2012 (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.