Deletion of South Portland Historic District

Comment: As the subject is an historic district on the National Register of Historic Places it Passes  & 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GEOLAND)

Comment: per Ipoellet, Pete Forsyth and TheCatalyst31.  I am ambivalent on this one case, because while I am critical of Another Believer's longstanding practice of creating single-sentence stubs (without even an infobox) and almost always never carrying out any expansion himself later, I recognize that this discussion should not be a referendum on one editor's practices, but just a discussion of this one "article".  I was tempted to abstain from this discussion, only because this entry has a map and (now, post-deletion-nomination) an infobox and several sentences of text, all things lacking from this editor's usual new "articles" on NRHP listings. And contrary to SportingFlyer's comment, the topic meets  by its being listed on the National Register.  However, at least for now, I am inclined to vote merge/redirect based mainly on my knowledge, based on past experience with this entry's creator, that this entry is unlikely to receive any substantial expansion or additional references in the foreseeable future.  I agree with nominator Doncram that the creation of ultra-short stubs in place of red links is not helpful and actually discourages some editors from creating ''real'' articles (it has done so for me in several instances), but in this one case I support leaving this as a redirect to the South Portland article, since it has existed as such since 2010 and since there a map of the historic district which can be included there
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: After comparing the article with the proposed target for merger, I reached the conclusion that there is sufficient information in the article to justify a keep. Subject meets  and the . My only concern was information organization and that has been put to rest
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GEOLAND||WP:GNG)

Comment: Wikipedia is . location is notable, even if there's overlap in other articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTPAPER)

Comment: meets ; a suitable stub at this point, I don't see that a merge would improve either article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GEOLAND)

Comment: We can't keep the current article as it is - there's only one source, and it's a primary source. At the moment, fails  and , and even if it passes can easily be merged back into the other article
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GEOLAND)