- 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The result was Withdrawn, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Tenhemad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I nominate this article for deletion because it has a lack of sources. In fact, it has none at all. Haberneroboy16 (talk) 07:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: If the village shows up on an official census then I think the norm is that villages and cities are considered notable. (WP:NGEOG) It would be good to have sources, but a lack of sources isn't always a rationale for deletion. An absence of sources on the net or beyond that would prove the article is notable would be, though.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:07, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep. Sources have been added, and per WP:GEOLAND, officially recorded villages as this one are considered notable. De728631 (talk) 17:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Look's ten times better, I will remove the prop deletion. --Haberneroboy16 (talk) 22:14, 27 January 2013 (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.