- 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. ✗ plicit 23:36, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Osowo Małe, Gmina Lipnica ( | 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)
A bot-created article by Kotbot, a bot run by retired user Kotniski. The location in the article is an empty field with a couple of what appear to be barns nearby.
The only source in the article is a link to the Teryt database (the Polish equivalent of GNIS), using the SIMC code from the Polish version of the article I find a listing that says, in machine translation, that Osowo Małe is a settlement (Osada) in the Gmina of Lipnica - no other information than this is provided. Osada under Polish law are not required to be inhabited and can be part of other settlements. Typically they are just individual buildings/farms, but sometimes there is nothing at the location.
This location is not a village (that would be listed as a wieś, not an osada), nor is it a hamlet (that would be a przysiółek), there is no evidence of inhabitation and good reasons to think it is not inhabited (there is nothing at the indicated location, the buildings near it don't appear inhabited).
Merging is pointless as the only accurately and reliably sourced information in the article is the name. No reliable source is provided for the location, for example.
In terms of redirection, there is no obvious redirect target - Osowo Duże ("Big Osowo" as compared to Osowo Małe which is "Little Osowo") is also an osada and appears to be an individual farm. Really Osowo Duże is also highly dubious in terms of notability but at least it isn't obviously not inhabited by anyone. Redirecting to Lipnica also seems pointless since this is at most just the name of a couple of buildings in Lipnica, a community of many, many buildings - such a link is unhelpful per WP:UNHELPFUL.
TL;DR this is a mass-created article that fails WP:GEOLAND, WP:NOPAGE, WP:GNG and WP:IINFO. FOARP ( talk) 18:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland. FOARP ( talk) 18:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Seriously, all these articles based on database entries that say only "X is a place at Y coordinates and Z elevation" need to stop. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 18:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per WeirdNAnnoyed. If a town/village is not notable enough for more detailed information then it is undeserving of a page
Yoblyblob (
talk)
18:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @ WeirdNAnnoyed@ Yoblyblob - I entirely agree. Sadly the WP:GEOLAND guideline has been read as allowing all these articles to be created from databases at a rate of one-per-minute, and then you have to spend 30 minutes to an hour proving that wrong by showing they either aren't legally-recognised or have never been inhabited, when the reality is they just blatantly aren't notable. Really the GEOLAND needs to change to be more restrictive to stop all this WP:IINFO, but that's another discussion. FOARP ( talk) 19:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete - Coordinates point to a single farm. – dlthewave ☎ 01:09, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Pl wiki has a footnote about former names, suggesting some kind of historical significance, even if mostly etymological at present. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:22, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a dictionary. FOARP ( talk) 08:40, 17 October 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 delete. ✗ plicit 23:36, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Osowo Małe, Gmina Lipnica ( | 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)
A bot-created article by Kotbot, a bot run by retired user Kotniski. The location in the article is an empty field with a couple of what appear to be barns nearby.
The only source in the article is a link to the Teryt database (the Polish equivalent of GNIS), using the SIMC code from the Polish version of the article I find a listing that says, in machine translation, that Osowo Małe is a settlement (Osada) in the Gmina of Lipnica - no other information than this is provided. Osada under Polish law are not required to be inhabited and can be part of other settlements. Typically they are just individual buildings/farms, but sometimes there is nothing at the location.
This location is not a village (that would be listed as a wieś, not an osada), nor is it a hamlet (that would be a przysiółek), there is no evidence of inhabitation and good reasons to think it is not inhabited (there is nothing at the indicated location, the buildings near it don't appear inhabited).
Merging is pointless as the only accurately and reliably sourced information in the article is the name. No reliable source is provided for the location, for example.
In terms of redirection, there is no obvious redirect target - Osowo Duże ("Big Osowo" as compared to Osowo Małe which is "Little Osowo") is also an osada and appears to be an individual farm. Really Osowo Duże is also highly dubious in terms of notability but at least it isn't obviously not inhabited by anyone. Redirecting to Lipnica also seems pointless since this is at most just the name of a couple of buildings in Lipnica, a community of many, many buildings - such a link is unhelpful per WP:UNHELPFUL.
TL;DR this is a mass-created article that fails WP:GEOLAND, WP:NOPAGE, WP:GNG and WP:IINFO. FOARP ( talk) 18:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland. FOARP ( talk) 18:22, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Seriously, all these articles based on database entries that say only "X is a place at Y coordinates and Z elevation" need to stop. WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk) 18:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per WeirdNAnnoyed. If a town/village is not notable enough for more detailed information then it is undeserving of a page
Yoblyblob (
talk)
18:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- @ WeirdNAnnoyed@ Yoblyblob - I entirely agree. Sadly the WP:GEOLAND guideline has been read as allowing all these articles to be created from databases at a rate of one-per-minute, and then you have to spend 30 minutes to an hour proving that wrong by showing they either aren't legally-recognised or have never been inhabited, when the reality is they just blatantly aren't notable. Really the GEOLAND needs to change to be more restrictive to stop all this WP:IINFO, but that's another discussion. FOARP ( talk) 19:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete - Coordinates point to a single farm. – dlthewave ☎ 01:09, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Pl wiki has a footnote about former names, suggesting some kind of historical significance, even if mostly etymological at present. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:22, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a dictionary. FOARP ( talk) 08:40, 17 October 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.