- 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 ( talk) 13:21, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Asia-2 ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Reason Intergalactic Tomato ( talk) 16:27, 28 January 2019 (UTC) No inherent notability per WP:NGEO
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: It is about a populated place. A sitio is apparently a legal subdivision of a barangay. A purok is a subdivision of a sitio. I don't know what level of districts these are comparable to for other nations, such as for India. Seems like a sitio is a legal neighborhood. We do allow articles on neighborhoods, especially legally defined ones. I'm not sure how far down these should be automatically accepted. However, about naming, perhaps there should be consistent practice using commas or parentheses, e.g. Sabang, Cabayugan is the Wikipedia article name for a sitio in the barangay of Cabayugan. There is a category of sitios and puroks in the Philippines. -- Doncram ( talk) 23:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: Perhaps redirect to Canlubang instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whooping Millennial ( talk • contribs) 09:32, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 February 13. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 00:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
- keep meets notability requirements (per Doncram)
, no argument advanced for deletion or redirection. I would close this as speedy keep, but the rule is-- DannyS712 ( talk) 03:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)The nominator withdraws the nomination or fails to advance any argument for deletion or redirection—perhaps only proposing an alternative action such as moving or merging—and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted or redirected
and Whooping Millennial also recommendeddeletionredirection -- DannyS712 ( talk) 03:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sheldybett ( talk) 03:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sheldybett ( talk) 03:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Weak nomination. Verifiably exists. At worst, redirect to Canlubang. Nomination fails WP:BEFORE. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 10:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Redirect. It has been a topic of debate for years already in Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines. Check Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines/Archive15#Barangay_notability as a reference. Usual decision was to redirect and merge with their higher administrative division. Since an article for Canlubang already exists, it could be redirected and merged there. -- Hiwilms ( talk) 16:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 04:36, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 04:36, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 ( talk) 13:21, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Asia-2 ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Reason Intergalactic Tomato ( talk) 16:27, 28 January 2019 (UTC) No inherent notability per WP:NGEO
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 13:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: It is about a populated place. A sitio is apparently a legal subdivision of a barangay. A purok is a subdivision of a sitio. I don't know what level of districts these are comparable to for other nations, such as for India. Seems like a sitio is a legal neighborhood. We do allow articles on neighborhoods, especially legally defined ones. I'm not sure how far down these should be automatically accepted. However, about naming, perhaps there should be consistent practice using commas or parentheses, e.g. Sabang, Cabayugan is the Wikipedia article name for a sitio in the barangay of Cabayugan. There is a category of sitios and puroks in the Philippines. -- Doncram ( talk) 23:53, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: Perhaps redirect to Canlubang instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whooping Millennial ( talk • contribs) 09:32, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 February 13. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 00:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
- keep meets notability requirements (per Doncram)
, no argument advanced for deletion or redirection. I would close this as speedy keep, but the rule is-- DannyS712 ( talk) 03:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)The nominator withdraws the nomination or fails to advance any argument for deletion or redirection—perhaps only proposing an alternative action such as moving or merging—and no one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted or redirected
and Whooping Millennial also recommendeddeletionredirection -- DannyS712 ( talk) 03:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sheldybett ( talk) 03:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sheldybett ( talk) 03:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Weak nomination. Verifiably exists. At worst, redirect to Canlubang. Nomination fails WP:BEFORE. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 10:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Redirect. It has been a topic of debate for years already in Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines. Check Wikipedia_talk:Tambayan_Philippines/Archive15#Barangay_notability as a reference. Usual decision was to redirect and merge with their higher administrative division. Since an article for Canlubang already exists, it could be redirected and merged there. -- Hiwilms ( talk) 16:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 04:36, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 04:36, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
- 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.