- 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. There is a clear current consensus for keep among participants of this discussion, and there is no prospect of the consensus changing. (non-admin closure) — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bhalgaon ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm unable to locate any reliable references to this location.
Terrickisaiah555
[T]/
[C]
00:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
list of India-related deletion discussions.
Terrickisaiah555
[T]/
[C]
00:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC) - Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 01:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. Listed as a village on the 2011 Indian Census, as the reference in the article says. So passes WP:GEOLAND. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:20, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- delete per
WP:GEOLAND is a bad guideline and this needs some
WP:TNT so someone who knows something can create a decent article. This is likely a real place, but a line in a census isn't enough for a separate article. The only geographic claim is vague, unsourced, and as best I could check fails verification. GNS is very sketchy and I don't know what other source we would use to reliably source the location. I assume all these issues are going to be ignored and the article we be kept as-is, but really we need to stop keeping junk permastub articles just to satisfy a guideline which people complain about constantly.
Mangoe (
talk)
12:59, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
- Whether you think it's a "bad guideline" or not is irrelevant. It is one. Some people complain about it. Many people support it. A few of the usual suspects complaining about it every time it's mentioned doesn't mean it should be scrapped. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment:
"a line in a census isn't enough for a separate article"
. Actually, one line for a village in one of the Indian Census's spreadsheets carries a lot of information. Hundreds of columns. No prose but a lot of stats. You could get a pretty good 1-2 paragraph stub out of that one line. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 01:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. But More work needs to be done! Micheal Kaluba ( talk) 14:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. Expansion is desirable but not strictly necessary. Real villages with census entries get articles per WP:GEOLAND a guideline which is correct in this case. Eluchil404 ( talk) 05:07, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per the WP:GEOLAND. Bhalgaon (भाल्गओं) has 3,119 inhabitants, as of 2011. It has the Postal Index Number code of 344706 and a government office, which grants it legal recognition. Site https://localbodydata.com/gram-panchayat-bhalgaon-35028 indicates key people like the sarpanch which proves inhabited. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 05:16, 26 November 2023 (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 keep. There is a clear current consensus for keep among participants of this discussion, and there is no prospect of the consensus changing. (non-admin closure) — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bhalgaon ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm unable to locate any reliable references to this location.
Terrickisaiah555
[T]/
[C]
00:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the
list of India-related deletion discussions.
Terrickisaiah555
[T]/
[C]
00:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 01:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. Listed as a village on the 2011 Indian Census, as the reference in the article says. So passes WP:GEOLAND. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:20, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- delete per
WP:GEOLAND is a bad guideline and this needs some
WP:TNT so someone who knows something can create a decent article. This is likely a real place, but a line in a census isn't enough for a separate article. The only geographic claim is vague, unsourced, and as best I could check fails verification. GNS is very sketchy and I don't know what other source we would use to reliably source the location. I assume all these issues are going to be ignored and the article we be kept as-is, but really we need to stop keeping junk permastub articles just to satisfy a guideline which people complain about constantly.
Mangoe (
talk)
12:59, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
- Whether you think it's a "bad guideline" or not is irrelevant. It is one. Some people complain about it. Many people support it. A few of the usual suspects complaining about it every time it's mentioned doesn't mean it should be scrapped. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment:
"a line in a census isn't enough for a separate article"
. Actually, one line for a village in one of the Indian Census's spreadsheets carries a lot of information. Hundreds of columns. No prose but a lot of stats. You could get a pretty good 1-2 paragraph stub out of that one line. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count) 01:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. But More work needs to be done! Micheal Kaluba ( talk) 14:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. Expansion is desirable but not strictly necessary. Real villages with census entries get articles per WP:GEOLAND a guideline which is correct in this case. Eluchil404 ( talk) 05:07, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per the WP:GEOLAND. Bhalgaon (भाल्गओं) has 3,119 inhabitants, as of 2011. It has the Postal Index Number code of 344706 and a government office, which grants it legal recognition. Site https://localbodydata.com/gram-panchayat-bhalgaon-35028 indicates key people like the sarpanch which proves inhabited. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 05:16, 26 November 2023 (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.