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.
Non-notable, unverifiable article on an apparent field. Two major problems with keeping this article:
Per
WP:GEOLAND, named natural features may have articles if significant content has been written about them. I was not able to find any indication that this is the case with regards to this area, and since we only have an English name and not an Arabic one, our native-language search is hampered.
FOARP, that is the exact book I called out in my nomination as utterly unreliable; please read the comments in the AfD I linked. Relying on it for anything is a failure of
WP:V. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)04:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Merge with
Fujairah. The most I can find are two sites that have basically the same information - geo coordinates, the type of plain it is that's about all. Even with the book mention above, I don't think this passes
WP:GEOLAND.
Aurornisxui (
talk)
19:03, 13 January 2019 (UTC) Looked some more, thought about it, Delete. Doesn't pass
WP:GEOLAND.reply
Delete unverifiable geographic location that has no coverage in reliable media. I also note that the page has been this way for more than a decade.
Aurornisxui the sources that you found with "basically the same info" most likely are Wikipedia mirrors. There is nothing verifiable to merge anywhere. --DBigXrayᗙ13:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Aurornisxui, thanks for the reply. Many map sites populate data after crawling through coordinates from Wikipedia and other map sites. So they may still fall under
WP:MIRROR. In any case the map sites are not enough for notability. --DBigXrayᗙ14:09, 17 January 2019 (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.
Non-notable, unverifiable article on an apparent field. Two major problems with keeping this article:
Per
WP:GEOLAND, named natural features may have articles if significant content has been written about them. I was not able to find any indication that this is the case with regards to this area, and since we only have an English name and not an Arabic one, our native-language search is hampered.
FOARP, that is the exact book I called out in my nomination as utterly unreliable; please read the comments in the AfD I linked. Relying on it for anything is a failure of
WP:V. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)04:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Merge with
Fujairah. The most I can find are two sites that have basically the same information - geo coordinates, the type of plain it is that's about all. Even with the book mention above, I don't think this passes
WP:GEOLAND.
Aurornisxui (
talk)
19:03, 13 January 2019 (UTC) Looked some more, thought about it, Delete. Doesn't pass
WP:GEOLAND.reply
Delete unverifiable geographic location that has no coverage in reliable media. I also note that the page has been this way for more than a decade.
Aurornisxui the sources that you found with "basically the same info" most likely are Wikipedia mirrors. There is nothing verifiable to merge anywhere. --DBigXrayᗙ13:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Aurornisxui, thanks for the reply. Many map sites populate data after crawling through coordinates from Wikipedia and other map sites. So they may still fall under
WP:MIRROR. In any case the map sites are not enough for notability. --DBigXrayᗙ14:09, 17 January 2019 (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.