- 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 speedy keep. No votes to delete, nominator withdraws. (non-admin closure) Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 21:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Víkarbyrgi
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Víkarbyrgi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not sourced at all. versacespace talk to me 05:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. versacespace talk to me 05:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 07:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 07:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: Although this village in the Faroe Islands no longer has permanent residents ( [1]), Google Books shows mention of it in the 14th century ("Before the Black Death came and devastated the Faroe Islands, Víkarbyrgi in Suđuroy was one of the largest villages" [2]) and in discussion of early 20th century local politics [3]. I think WP:GEOLAND criterion 1 applies here. AllyD ( talk) 08:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well Johansen 1963, p. 12 does seem to indicate that (a) it's not in Scotland, (b) sources can be found, (c) it was indeed populated back in the 1960s.
- Uncle G ( talk) 08:11, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep not being sourced is not a reason for deletion unless no sources can be found - a quick look at foreign language Wikipedia sites, especially Faroese, show this likely passes WP:GEOLAND. Needs improvement, not deletion. SportingFlyer T· C 14:49, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per AllyD's sources; this seems to be a legitimate GEOLAND-passing village. Hog Farm Talk 18:57, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep — @ VersaceSpace, As Hog Farm already stated, id do you one better by pointing to the relevant guideline which is WP:NEXIST, & per NEXIST Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. Celestina007 ( talk) 23:09, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @ Celestina007: Thank you. I didn't understand the guideline when I first read it and nominated it, and I would like to withdraw my nomination but do not know how to. versacespace talk to me 00:07, 5 April 2021 (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 speedy keep. No votes to delete, nominator withdraws. (non-admin closure) Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 21:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Víkarbyrgi
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Víkarbyrgi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not sourced at all. versacespace talk to me 05:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. versacespace talk to me 05:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 07:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 07:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: Although this village in the Faroe Islands no longer has permanent residents ( [1]), Google Books shows mention of it in the 14th century ("Before the Black Death came and devastated the Faroe Islands, Víkarbyrgi in Suđuroy was one of the largest villages" [2]) and in discussion of early 20th century local politics [3]. I think WP:GEOLAND criterion 1 applies here. AllyD ( talk) 08:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Well Johansen 1963, p. 12 does seem to indicate that (a) it's not in Scotland, (b) sources can be found, (c) it was indeed populated back in the 1960s.
- Uncle G ( talk) 08:11, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep not being sourced is not a reason for deletion unless no sources can be found - a quick look at foreign language Wikipedia sites, especially Faroese, show this likely passes WP:GEOLAND. Needs improvement, not deletion. SportingFlyer T· C 14:49, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per AllyD's sources; this seems to be a legitimate GEOLAND-passing village. Hog Farm Talk 18:57, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep — @ VersaceSpace, As Hog Farm already stated, id do you one better by pointing to the relevant guideline which is WP:NEXIST, & per NEXIST Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. Celestina007 ( talk) 23:09, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- @ Celestina007: Thank you. I didn't understand the guideline when I first read it and nominated it, and I would like to withdraw my nomination but do not know how to. versacespace talk to me 00:07, 5 April 2021 (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.