Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Central Correctional Institute

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, no substantial reasons presented for keeping (the

North Central Correctional Institute

North Central Correctional Institute (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Does not assert the importance or significance of the subject -- ßottesiηi ^(talk) 21:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nom. Xdenizen 21:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. State hospitals and prisons are notable. -- Necrothesp 01:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Disagree. It is merely a building and has no greater inherent notability than any other building. I'm almost tempted to slap a {{db-context}} tag on this one. Resolute 02:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I dislike "if x, then y" arguments as much as anyone else, but it really does seem silly to keep articles on local high schools but delete ones on state prisons. If someone wants to expand this article, I would suggest using this as a reference.
  ergot 20:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Comment Indeed, it provides a nice continuity for those students going directly from one sort of institution to the other. In any event, do we keep articles on local high schools if they aren't notable for some other reason than that they're a high school? I haven't ever seen a clear consensus on that, but maybe someone can point me to one. --TheOtherBob 00:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I see no inherent notability in prisons, nor does this article make the case for it. --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 16:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete While I have no problem with the notability of this subject, and articles needs more than an introductory statement. Unless someone wants to expand this I don't see why it cannot be delete for lack of content. As is, it is basically a dictdef for a proper noun. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. While the topic is notable, the article is not even a stub. Get it up to stuub status and it becomes a speedy keep. Vegaswikian 07:41, 11 November 2006 (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.