Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coat of arms of Baia Mare

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 merge to Baia Mare. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 17:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms of Baia Mare

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

This article just has an infobox and no content. Everything in the infobox can be seen by looking at the image or at Baia Mare. Oddbodz (talk) 18:57, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now it has leading section and some content. Can it be removed from the deletion list? --ES Vic (talk) 10:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I still think that this infomation should just be moved to Baia Mare and the article deleted. Its not a particuarly notable coat of arms that deserves its own article. Oddbodz (talk) 18:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep though Merge into Baia Mare would be appropriate if the article is considered in isolation.M1rtyn (talk) 02:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article is part of a larger body of work on Romanian heraldry with a number of contributors over a long period, for which the vast majority of Coats of Arms have been created with their own pages. Rather than continuing this discussion in isolation, I would recommend withdrawing this deletion request, and instead nominate multiple pages for deletion, including the articles for coats of arms for all Romanian County capitals, as this would likely generate more discussion.

Perhaps a request should be made of WP:HV to provide quidelines on Notability? A brief review of Coats of Arms of other counties indicates that no other editiors have considered stand-alone articles for heraldry at this sub-state level appropriate.M1rtyn (talk) 02:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:35, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to the Mare page. Not worth a page by itself. History2007 (talk) 14:40, 15 January 2012 (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.