Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corkman Irish Pub

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 02:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Corkman Irish Pub

Non-notable, prod removed Delete --Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 02:05, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Historical building in Melbourne. Bobby1011 02:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems historic enogugh and seems to have a notable presence [1] [2] on the net and google AdamJacobMuller 02:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep only b/c very old. the.crazy.russian (T) (C) (E) 03:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep per Bobby. JoshuaZ 03:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC) rename and redirect per below. JoshuaZ 22:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notable pub with historical interest. --Ter e nc e Ong 05:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable enough for mine. Capitalistroadster 05:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a notable building --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 06:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 05:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as notable enough, and I have a soft spot for buildings. --Cyde Weys 08:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Well known pub near the city. -- Synapse 13:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all above. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 14:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As nom - I don't think, in my case, a public house is notable. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 20:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Building with a long history in Melbourne; I wonder personally whether it should be moved to Carlton Inn, since that was the name it was known by for almost 150 years until only 4 years ago, and the redirect reversed? --Ishel99 02:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment That makes sense to me, but I don't have a strong enough preference to vote for it in either direction. JoshuaZ 02:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all of the above remarks on keeping the article. ¡Dustimagic! ^(T/C) 04:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This article does an excellent job of establishing the Corkman's historical significance. I, for one, found it very interesting and informative, and will now proceed there for a quiet ale (all in the name of research, of course). Cnwb 06:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a building of historic interest. I second the motion to rename it as Carlton Inn - it sounds like it's now another historic public house given a generic name. ProhibitOnions 20:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I also agree. Corkman Irish Pub should redirect to Carlton Inn. Cnwb 22:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep and rename . Sounds historically interesting. -- Ian ≡ talk 09:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep . Has important historical relevence to the local area. --Mawbid 2 11:19, 22 March 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.