Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fire safety plan

Fire safety plan

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

Deprodded for no good reason. Listy, somewhere between a how-to and a dicdef. Can't see this being anything more than what it is now. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: An article should be assessed based on whether it has a realistic potential for expansion, not how frequently it has been edited to date (see WP:NOEFFORT) --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - We already have Fire Safety. The style is also non-encyclopedic in parts. S_peakF_ree ^(talk)_(contribs) 18:32, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Topic is worthy. Could be merged to Fire safety, as a section or kept separate per WP:Summary style.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed Poor (talk • contribs) 19:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fire safety plan a plausible redirect to Fire safety. Accordingly "listy, somewhere between a how-to and a dicdef" is not a valid rationale for deletion. AfD is not for merger proposals. James500 (talk) 17:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As very note worthy and is used in commercial buildings throughout the US. It is required by law through building codes. It should be included as a separate listing within the Wiki.. Other sources of reference might include [[1]]. Similar codes may exist world wide.--User:Warrior777 (talk) 06:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]