269:
I think many beaches will be notable on their own--they are essentially parks, and all state parks at least are considered notable --there being inevitably sufficient documentation. But I am not quite sure this beach is prominent enough for that. I am surprised that anyone should have written an
293:
Oh yes beaches can be notable on their own (at least I hope so, I wrote an article about one!), but as with anything else, there has to be enough citable material to make it worth having an article. nature reserve beaches, major tourist and historic beaches are all notable. The thing is, is
270:
article of this sort without giving sources, especially since at least part of the article is clearly asked on them. I added what
English sources I could find quickly on google (there are also some in Welsh, but I was forced to ignore them) . The BBC source has information of the pools.
248:. The beach, currently part of the village, can easily be included there, including the information on said ancient fishing pools. Although I did not find any sources about these fishing pools. Merger should consider that.
227:. Clearly the nominator is not taking into account factors such as the fishing pools mentioned which can be expanded and have historical significance. No need to focus on one hotel. --
135:
Non-notable location. If the hotel itself passes notability requirements then that should have an article, but notability is not inherited; the rest of of the place is, well, a beach.
128:
203:
17:
157:- I've already added the meat of the article there. Beaches are rarely notable on their own, even if they do have a nice hotel.
95:
90:
52:
99:
332:
36:
82:
331:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
311:
256:
162:
186:
60:
315:
281:
261:
236:
218:
190:
166:
144:
64:
232:
303:
140:
51:
with no prejudice to restoring if new sources are found or there is a strong consensus to do so (
307:
250:
214:
158:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
182:
56:
228:
86:
136:
277:
210:
116:
176:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
78:
70:
272:
306:, which seems to undermine the case for notability (nice find though).
299:
245:
154:
47:
325:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
123:
112:
108:
104:
298:beach worth an article, or can it be combined with
181:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
335:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
204:list of Wales-related deletion discussions
202:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
316:23:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
282:22:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
262:13:49, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
237:16:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
219:05:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
191:00:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
167:21:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
145:17:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
65:00:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
302:? The BBC page you mention
352:
328:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
44:The result was
221:
207:
193:
53:non-admin closure
343:
330:
208:
198:
180:
178:
126:
120:
102:
34:
351:
350:
346:
345:
344:
342:
341:
340:
339:
333:deletion review
326:
304:is about Llanon
260:
174:
122:
93:
77:
74:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
349:
347:
338:
337:
321:
320:
319:
318:
285:
284:
264:
254:
239:
222:
195:
194:
179:
171:
170:
169:
133:
132:
73:
68:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
348:
336:
334:
329:
323:
322:
317:
313:
309:
305:
301:
297:
292:
289:
288:
287:
286:
283:
279:
275:
274:
268:
265:
263:
259:
258:
253:
252:
247:
243:
240:
238:
234:
230:
226:
223:
220:
216:
212:
205:
201:
197:
196:
192:
188:
184:
177:
173:
172:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
149:
148:
147:
146:
142:
138:
130:
125:
118:
114:
110:
106:
101:
97:
92:
88:
84:
80:
76:
75:
72:
69:
67:
66:
62:
58:
54:
50:
49:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
327:
324:
308:Totnesmartin
295:
290:
271:
266:
255:
249:
241:
224:
199:
175:
159:Totnesmartin
150:
134:
46:redirect to
45:
43:
31:
28:
225:Strong keep
183:Ron Ritzman
57:Ron Ritzman
229:Balloholic
79:Plas morfa
71:Plas morfa
267:Weak keep
211:• Gene93k
137:Ironholds
151:Redirect
129:View log
291:Comment
251:Sleaves
96:protect
91:history
300:Llanon
246:Llanon
155:Llanon
124:delete
100:delete
48:Llanon
242:Merge
127:) – (
117:views
109:watch
105:links
16:<
312:talk
296:this
278:talk
257:talk
233:talk
215:talk
200:Note
187:talk
163:talk
141:talk
113:logs
87:talk
83:edit
61:talk
273:DGG
244:to
209:--
206:.
153:to
314:)
280:)
235:)
217:)
189:)
165:)
143:)
115:|
111:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
63:)
55:)
310:(
276:(
231:(
213:(
185:(
161:(
139:(
131:)
121:(
119:)
81:(
59:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.