Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of placenames containing the word "new"

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.--Fuhghettaboutit 09:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of placenames containing the word "new"[edit]

Its an unencyclopedic list. See WP:NOT#DIR New England ^{Review Me!}/Go Red Sox! 20:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Ridiculous waste of time. Imagine the slippery slope if we keep this. What's next, "list of placenames containing vowels"? Tendancer 20:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per WP:NOT#DIR.Tbo ¹⁵⁷talk 20:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per Tbo_157. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomj (talk • contribs) 21:12, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
Weak delete Nothing new here, but it could have been made an interesting article if there were more to it than the indiscriminate blue links. Naples (Neopolis), Novgorod, New Town all mean the same thing, and there was an "old" Jersey, Orleans, England, Mexico, York, etc. before the new ones were founded. As it is, however, it really is just a list of placenames containing the word "new", just like it says. Who knew? Mandsford 21:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This list has been around for long time. Deleting it now is deletion for the deletion, and of no use. As Mandsford states, adding some background would enhance the article. LHOON 21:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Survival does not grant notability. Which means

Delete. MarkBul 22:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - directory of non-associated topics with nothing in common past a coincidence of name. Otto4711 22:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per Mandsford. A more general article and list might have a point, but this one does not. DGG (talk) 02:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm surprised it's survived for so long. WP:NOT#INFO. Shalom ^Hello 02:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. More pointless and indiscriminate than any list I've seen in a while. Crazysuit 02:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Random list. - Shudde ^talk 03:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per list of loosely associated topics. Sharing a word in the name is not a strong relation between these places Corpx 04:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One option could be to replace the article by a category placenames containing the word new ... LHOON —Preceding unsigned comment added by LHOON (talk • contribs) 05:07, August 28, 2007 (UTC)
Delete Unmaintainable. LHOON got a good option. -- GarbageCollection - ^!Collect 05:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unmaintainable, unrelated mess. Shoester 06:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as utterly unmaintainable listcruft and a textbook example of why even legitimate list articles are having a hard time surviving on Wikipedia. 23skidoo 16:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP THis is a cool page!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morspecs911 (talk • contribs) , August 28, 2007
Delete as an indiscriminate list. It's probably as indiscriminate as a list of all placenames containing the words "North", "South", "East", or "West". --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 21:56, 29 August 2007 (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.