Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as disambiguation page. sjorford →•← 10:50, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Central

Unencyclopaedic, just a list of links elsewhere. ThomasWinwood 01:03, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

• ... as most disambiguation articles are. This is a very badly written disambiguation article. I've given it a once over. There do appear to be various places and things commonly named "Central", and there thus appears to be a need for a disambiguation article. Keep. Uncle G 01:57, 2005 Apr 17 (UTC)
• Keep as useful disambig page. FreplySpang (talk) 01:58, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, noting that encyclopedias are more useful when they are navigable. Kappa 03:08, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Plenty of things to point to. -- 8^D ^gab 03:22, 2005 Apr 17 (UTC)
• Keep, useful dab page. Megan1967 05:36, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, useful as pointed out by others. Mgm|^(talk) 10:18, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep What WP:NOT refers to is lists of external links. I've improved it a little more. Chris talk back 21:35, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually, WP:ALSONOT lists of internal links. Nevertheless, keep as valid disambig. Radiant_* 13:59, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. But Uncle G is very right, this article needs work. Mainly because it contains a lot of links (and non-link references) that should not be on a disambiguation page. --- Isaac R 03:39, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. --Myles Long 14:48, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.