Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chirayinkeezhu

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 06:51, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chirayinkeezhu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page relies on only one source, and is generally unexpanded. The article does not suggest any amount of importance to the place, nor does it provide reliable sources, which is in violation of Wikipedia policies. EggRoll97 (talk) 11:20, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:27, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 17:27, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Procedural Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Notable taluk with a population of over 70,000 in 2011. Has received substantial news coverage 1, 2 3 and more. MT Train^Talk 17:42, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep obviously notable and these page issues do not require deletion. —innotata 22:24, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per GEOLAND and [1] says it is "an important taluk in Trivandrum district". SpinningSpark 23:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. The taluk has a Wikipedia article at Chirayinkeezhu taluk. This article at AfD is about the seat village of the taluk. Census of India does not have a separate population figure for the village. Independent sources for the village are thin. • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, I missed the distinction between the taluk and the village, but I still think this is a keep per GEOLAND. It would be extremely perverse of us to have an article on every village in the taluk except the head village. SpinningSpark 05:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Spinningspark. Even I didn't notice the article on the taluk initially, but as the main village in the taluk, this article deserves a space in Wikipedia. MT Train^Talk 13:33, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Easily passes WP:NGEO. Smartyllama (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2018 (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.