Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logie Awards of 1972

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 of the debate was KEEP. kingboyk 03:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Logie Awards of 1972

This page was prodded and then de-proded claiming that it was part of the coverage of the Logie Awards. The Logie awards are already adequately covered in their own article. This article adds nothing significant or notable to that. Delete. --Hetar 20:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand. Many years of the Logie Awards have articles, see Template:Logie Awards years. --Rory0 96 20:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand per above. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No valid reason given for deletion and no reason was given for the prod [1]. Nom does not seem familiar with the organization of our logie coverage here. It also amazes me that users see afd as a solution rather than expansion. -- JJay 23:13, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The valid reason given was that there was -no- useful information in the article. None. At all. Do we really need to have an article that merely says the Logie awards were held on that day in 1972? --Hetar 23:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who submitted it considers it useful. The people who created the Logie template consider it useful. The users who read the logie articles consider it useful. I think it will be even more useful as more content is added. That you do not consider it useful is your opinion, it is not sufficient for me to want to remove the beginnings of an article on a verifiable subject that gets us that much closer to comprehensive coverage of the Logie awards. -- JJay 23:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand as per JJay Golfcam 03:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I have expanded the article from verifiable information about the award winners and the show. Capitalistroadster 03:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 04:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)"[reply]
Keep. Many other award ceremonies have inidvidual articles for each year. Cnwb 05:37, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- and expand. - Longhair 07:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand.--cj | talk 03:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sarah Ewart (Talk) 06:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep expanded article, and recommend expanding the rest of the series to the same level. (Well done to Capitalistroadster). --Scott Davis ^Talk 12:27, 8 March 2006 (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.