Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Springtail Bluff

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 keep. Not clear from ANI discussion whether SK#2 applies here, so regular (non-speedy) keep by week-long consensus. (non-admin closure) czar · · 01:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Springtail Bluff

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

~~Reading this page, I can't see what it is noteworthy at all. Basically a stub for 3 years that says nothing more than it exists. UnrepentantTaco (talk) 22:04, 15 June 2013 (UTC)~~ [Edit reverted as per WP:BE and [1]. Unscintillating (talk) 13:57, 23 June 2013 (UTC)][reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Antarctica-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As uninteresting as this article is, it meets WP:NGEO in my opinion. Noteworthy and notability are two different things and according to WP:MAPOUTCOMES, this article is likely to survive. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 23:42, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Meets WP:NGEO. Nom took this Straight to AfD without a PROD. One of several disruptive AfDs by the same nominator. Dolovis (talk) 02:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment PROD not a required step for AFD, thanks for WP:FAITH. UnrepentantTaco (talk) 18:48, 19 June 2013 (UTC) [Edit reverted as per WP:BE and [2]. Unscintillating (talk) 13:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)][reply]
Speedy close, speedy keep: The nominator was blocked as of 06:52, 21 June 2013 for sock puppetry per a discussion "Disruptive creation of groundless AFDs, probable sockpuppetry". Also nominator cannot vote inside the nomination - removed. Crtew (talk) 16:27, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SK 2a The closer should keep in mind the large number of nominations made on a large, diverse set of articles that the nominator made on the same day.Crtew (talk) 05:30, 22 June 2013 (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.