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. Bucketsofg 14:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Registered Historic Places in Malta[edit]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. -- Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 04:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete article as a useless list that can be split into other lists.

Firstly, the article appears to be named after a page under Category:National Register of Historic Places, an American organisation. However there doesn't seem to be an official register of Maltese historic places according to Google (and certainly no organisation in the country called the National Register of Historic Places). Secondly, there are separate lists for this kind of information (List of forts, for example) as well as a comprehensive list of buildings under Category:Buildings and structures in Malta.

Unless there is a consensus by some users to create lists of historical attractions by country (which I doubt), this article is pointless. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 17:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and lack of sources, context, or defined notability. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. — PSUMark2006 talk | contribs 18:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Malta isn't a U.S. state, territory, or commonwealth, so it doesn't have anything on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. The list of historic places in Malta is unsourced because there's no citation of any agency that has certified these buildings and structures as being on a register. I'm hesitant to recommend deleting this article altogether, but it should at least be renamed as just a list of historic sites in Malta, without any association implied with the U.S. National Register. Category:World Heritage Sites in Malta might be an appropriate starting point for this list, and a list of other palaces and structures in Malta would also be worthwhile. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 20:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Elkman, there are already lists for forts, museums, cathedrals, palaces etc., where Maltese attractions are listed. Do we really need another list that simply bunches them up together? ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 21:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There does seem to be a "National Protective Inventory" for Malta, commonly called "listed buildings", as well as "urban conservation areas" and "scheduled areas", equivalent to historic districts etc. City of Malta guide (slightly broken). It seems as if there is a list, if it exists and can be sourced, Malta should be treated the same as the US, UK, and other nations. --Dhartung | Talk 05:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Dhartung's comments. Nobody thinks to delete the American National Register of Historic Places and other countries similar lists should be treated the same. --Oakshade 04:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete: it is a kind of own research (probably), it could be compared to the US National Register and could be taken as something official (it is neither nor), we have an official list - the UNESCO heritage one, and any other list will stay very subjective and own research - first of all when we call it list. Let us make a catogory for such things, or the mentioned list of museums etc., there is no subjective problem. The page mentioned by Dhartung seems to be something else, although it could be used in an article. Sure, Malta has a lot to show, and there can be done a lot, but I guess not this way. -jkb- 10:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I can see no evidence on the website provided by Dhartung that the Malta Environment and Planning Authority is committed to preserving Malta's historic buildings. As far as from what I've read, the company is Malta's national environmental regulator and land use planning agency [1] and does not participate in building conservation.
However I have just found an organisation that does. Heritage Malta is a national agency set up by the Maltese Government, and I guess this is the closest thing to an official register available.
Instead of having another list, I think it would be best to incorporate the list into a Heritage Malta article. Unless anyone has any other ideas, I shall get to work on it. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 19:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is what I have ment - make a page about it, great. But, I wonder if you will succeed - I know this page (heritagemalta.com), it was reported in many articles, but I have never succeeded to open it... -jkb- 07:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but probably rename, per all the reasons given so far. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 04:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Wykejbs's comment of 25 February 2007 and Dhartung. jkb, your problem may be that it's http://www.heritagemalta.org/heritagesites.html (and not .com). However, as said, renaming may be helpful. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Dhartung. Malta is a popular tourist destination within Europe, and one of its main attractions is the cultural heritage; this list would be useful for anyone wishing to find out more about the islands. Renaming would be a good idea though (remove the 'registered' part). CounterFX 12:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again: if Wykebjs makes something like Heritage Malta from that page, it will be fully OK, but the present list makes an attempt to be something official - and this is not (no source etc.). My oppinion. -jkb- 12:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find no objection to that. The reason I recommended keeping the article is that it will probably take longer than the duration of the AfD nomination for such an article to be set up. Just a thought: How about renaming the present article itself to Heritage Malta, and then replacing it with Wykebjs's version once it is completed? CounterFX 14:01, 1 March 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.