- 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 delete. T. Canens ( talk) 23:17, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Ceris I & II ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG. hueman1 (talk) 10:22, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:34, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:34, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Keep : Topic satisfies WP:GEOLAND. David.moreno72 11:02, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- How exactly? Where is the in-depth coverage of its historic, social, economic, or architectural importance? -- Pontificalibus 05:12, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - housing developments are not inherently notable - does not meet WP:GNG, no "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" - the book cited has two passing mentions only - perhaps a Merge with Canlubang, but probably not notable enough for a merge - Epinoia ( talk) 02:38, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. The single keep !vote here points to WP:GEOLAND as the only justification for this article's subject's notability. As a sitio, which is not a legally recognized administrative subdivision in the Philippines, Ceris I & II falls under the "populated places without legal recognition" category which means we should evaluate this under WP:GNG, which it fails to meet. — seav ( talk) 13:10, 14 May 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 delete. T. Canens ( talk) 23:17, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Ceris I & II ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG. hueman1 (talk) 10:22, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:34, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:34, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- Keep : Topic satisfies WP:GEOLAND. David.moreno72 11:02, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
- How exactly? Where is the in-depth coverage of its historic, social, economic, or architectural importance? -- Pontificalibus 05:12, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - housing developments are not inherently notable - does not meet WP:GNG, no "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" - the book cited has two passing mentions only - perhaps a Merge with Canlubang, but probably not notable enough for a merge - Epinoia ( talk) 02:38, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. The single keep !vote here points to WP:GEOLAND as the only justification for this article's subject's notability. As a sitio, which is not a legally recognized administrative subdivision in the Philippines, Ceris I & II falls under the "populated places without legal recognition" category which means we should evaluate this under WP:GNG, which it fails to meet. — seav ( talk) 13:10, 14 May 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.