- 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. The guideline says places are notable, sources exist. Tone 18:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Chachowal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete Seems to be the place where the user lives; not notable. Scythre (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Verifiable ___location, census designated and even The Tribune covered the local government elections. -SpacemanSpiffCalvin‡Hobbes 22:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- -SpacemanSpiffCalvin‡Hobbes 22:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep Existing place, reliable sources. --Vejvančický (talk) 22:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep per Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Places, and verified by reliable sources. Priyanath talk 00:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep all verifiable distinct settlements are sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article. Thryduulf (talk) 11:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 11:19, 12 August 2009 (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.