Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rocks Green

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 Ludford, Shropshire. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:39, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rocks Green (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Appears to be a non-notable housing development. Fails GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:02, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 13:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Ludlow: The Ludlow article already contained some material on the town's Sainsbury's store, also at Rocks Green, so I have blended the information on the housing development and its design award there. I don't see enough to justify a distinct article, but a redirect seems a reasonable WP:ATD. AllyD (talk) 13:42, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Ludford, Shropshire may also be a better target as its in that parish and Ludlow BUA seems to exclude Rocks Green. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:59, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:00, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• It is an OS settlement (as "Rockgreen"[1]) so may qualify as legally recognized but that may only apply to census areas. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect/Merge to Ludford, Shropshire. That can provide as an incubator for Rocks Green for now. There is not enough currently as it is to justify a distinct article, as AllyD said, although I am not sure if that will remain the case forever. Probably forever, but who knows. A merge/redirect avoids any issues on that question here, though. It fits into the Ludford article nicely. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 16:01, 26 October 2022 (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.