Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CET Piteşti

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 no consensus. Participants of the discussion have not reached a consensus after 2 relists. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 02:52, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

CET Piteşti

CET Piteşti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non notable structure, backed up by only a voutube video as a source XyzSpaniel Talk Page 23:12, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:25, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:57, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Merge, probably to List of tallest structures in Romania#CET Piteşti] (with creation of a target anchor in the CET Piteşti row in the list-article). Deletion would be wrong obviously, in my opinion, as there is the good alternative to deletion of merging the material and leaving a redirect behind. I say Merge rather than Keep because the article is very weak and its substantial content is not more than can be included in a row in the table at List of tallest structures in Romania So what if there is a Youtube video as a source, there is nothing wrong with Youtube videos being used like photographs that establish the reality of something, and it can be used as a source in the table row. Leaving the redirect preserves edit history and allows for re-creation if/when there is more material including sources. --doncram 01:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

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.