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.
Keep - It does seem to be a real designated place.
[2] There's nothing particularly advertising-looking in the article and even if there was that would be a matter of regular editing, not deletion. --
Oakshade (
talk)
05:01, 2 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. "No sources" in the article is a valid reason for tagging the article with {{refimprove}} or the like, but it is not a valid reason for deletion. And there is obligation to do some research on the topic, before nominating an article for deletion. --
doncram05:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep An article that needs work needs work but does why should it get deleted if it meets
WP:GEOLAND "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. Even abandoned places can remain notable, because notability encompasses their entire history. One exception is that census tracts are usually not considered notable." --
Jersey92 (
talk)
03:26, 3 January 2017 (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.
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.
Keep - It does seem to be a real designated place.
[2] There's nothing particularly advertising-looking in the article and even if there was that would be a matter of regular editing, not deletion. --
Oakshade (
talk)
05:01, 2 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. "No sources" in the article is a valid reason for tagging the article with {{refimprove}} or the like, but it is not a valid reason for deletion. And there is obligation to do some research on the topic, before nominating an article for deletion. --
doncram05:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep An article that needs work needs work but does why should it get deleted if it meets
WP:GEOLAND "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. Even abandoned places can remain notable, because notability encompasses their entire history. One exception is that census tracts are usually not considered notable." --
Jersey92 (
talk)
03:26, 3 January 2017 (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.