- 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.
List of satellite map images with missing or unclear data
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Gugrak ( talk) 11:50, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of satellite map images with missing or unclear data ( | 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)
This is a bizarre OR list with no indication of notability Gugrak ( talk) 10:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Gugrak ( talk) 10:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep - I have to admit that I was very ready to press the "delete" button on this one based on the strange title, but once I looked at the article I noted that, yes, there are a lot of reliable sources that list and describe places that are obfuscated on Google maps for privacy/secrecy reasons and so-forth. To pass WP:LISTN all that is needed is evidence that multiple reliable sources treat the the list-items as a collective group, and that is shown by the Times of India article, Washington Post article, and others. Possibly the article could be renamed, but that is a different discussion. Similarly accuracy and WP:OR issues can be fixed with ordinary editing. FOARP ( talk) 11:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per FOARP. The article is not without issues, but the sources provided are valid and thus the topic passes WP:NLIST. Highway 89 ( talk) 23:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per FOARP Dream Focus 00:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I have resolved the OR concerns as well by removing all of the entries that were unsourced or supported only by a satellite map. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 06:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 06:49, 7 March 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.
List of satellite map images with missing or unclear data
The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Gugrak ( talk) 11:50, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of satellite map images with missing or unclear data ( | 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)
This is a bizarre OR list with no indication of notability Gugrak ( talk) 10:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Gugrak ( talk) 10:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep - I have to admit that I was very ready to press the "delete" button on this one based on the strange title, but once I looked at the article I noted that, yes, there are a lot of reliable sources that list and describe places that are obfuscated on Google maps for privacy/secrecy reasons and so-forth. To pass WP:LISTN all that is needed is evidence that multiple reliable sources treat the the list-items as a collective group, and that is shown by the Times of India article, Washington Post article, and others. Possibly the article could be renamed, but that is a different discussion. Similarly accuracy and WP:OR issues can be fixed with ordinary editing. FOARP ( talk) 11:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per FOARP. The article is not without issues, but the sources provided are valid and thus the topic passes WP:NLIST. Highway 89 ( talk) 23:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per FOARP Dream Focus 00:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I have resolved the OR concerns as well by removing all of the entries that were unsourced or supported only by a satellite map. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 06:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 06:49, 7 March 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.