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, because there is no consensus to delete. - Richardcavell 22:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any notability criterion for libraries, but having only 12 600 items (presumably not any rare documents or books) does not seem adequate for a library of note. Acyso 23:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Anchor Point, Alaska. The main article mentions that the library has only 1 employee. I have a sneaking suspicion that the creator is that employee. - Richfife 00:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• No, the creator is not that employee, I'm a volunteer at the John Trigg Ester Library. I'm trying to create stubs for Alaska libraries, and then get back to them all and fill out the information on each library. It's taking a while. Just because a library is small doesn't seem to me to be a reason to delete the article about it. I'd say it's rather significant that such a small town (Anchor Point is NOT big) actually has a library. I'm working on two lists relating to Wikipedia:WikiProject Alaska: Alaska newspapers and periodicals, and Alaska libraries. I'll grant that it might be more appropriate to put this information under Anchor Point rather than as a separate article, depending on what I find out about the library. I also wouldn't bet that it has no rare documents—a lot of small libraries in Alaska have interesting tidbits from the early 1900s and earlier, town founders and whatnot having come up with the Russians or the gold stampeders. Deirdre 19:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Suggestion I'm concerned that Wikipedia is full of projects that people start and then never finish (not to imply this is one of them), so this could set a bad precedent. Perhaps if you created the stub pages in your personal namespace (or in a Wiki of your own) and then moved them into the article namespace en masse when they're ready? Simply put a "User:Deirdre/" in front of them like so: User:Deirdre/Anchor_Point_Public_Library - Richfife 21:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not something I knew how to do--thanks! I'll work on these stubs and try to get them out of the way pronto, but in future will follow your suggestion. Deirdre 01:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I went to this page because I had no idea Anchor Point had a library! It's notable and deserves its own page! Jarfingle 18:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, why is it more notable than the thousands of other small town libraries out there? Wikipedia isn't a phonebook. - Richfife 02:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I think every small town (or large town for that matter) should have its own article for its library, its high school, etc. because they're all unique and interesting. I would love to be able to go to a Average Joe City page and read more than its population, percentage of minorities, and rough sketch of history but everything from high to low — and links to more in-depth articles...I'd love to see a Wikipedia with the quantity of a phonebook and the quality of an encyclopedia...Just my take on things. Jarfingle 17:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but... make sure you don't cross into WP:POINT territory - Richfife 17:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Verifiable. --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · contribs · e@} 04:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge; both Anchor Point Public Library and Anchor Point, Alaska are tiny articles; I do not see what's the benefits of having two separate articles, especially since the second only tells how many volumes they have (Liberatore, 2006). 17:47, 8 August 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.