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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conaway Ranch[edit]

Conaway Ranch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This page should be deleted as there are no links to it; it will be difficult to introduce links and the topic seems non-notable GDon4t0 22:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep If and only if it gets some cleanup/wikification. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 22:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Clean-up is nessesary, but not deletion as this is a notable place. Per WP:NOTE, it's the subject of multiple published works. Here are just a few [1] [2] [3] --Oakshade 04:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It needs a little work, but most articles do. It's a real place, has gotten lots of press as the subject of a major controversy (the timeline ends while the trial was still scheduled) of eminent domain which tends to be as much a political hot potato as a legal one, etc. Carlossuarez46 06:56, 25 February 2007 (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.