Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gaibandha District
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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The result of the debate was withdrawn by nominator. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 00:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gaibandha District
The page gives no info. Can be remade when people contributes more info.Soumyasch 15:08, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, the page has been expanded enough in less than a day. I take back the nomination now. --Soumyasch 17:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Obvious Keep. A stub article on a subject of undenied notability. So fix it. Monicasdude 15:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: It's a standard stub. In fact it might be a little nicer than standard with some placeholders for sections. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per well argued nomination. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 17:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep verifiable place [news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4367193.stm] Dlyons493 Talk 17:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep DevanJedi 01:53, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep: Quite a bad faith nomination. I have created stub articles for all the 64 districts of Bangladesh. Gradually, information is being filled in. The place if verifiable, and it is the norm in Wikipedia to have articles for geographical places, administrative regions etc. Thanks. --Ragib 17:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep Geographic areas are always notable, regardless if they are stubs. Eivind 19:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep With 1,244 villages the population must be at least a few hundred thousand. Hawkestone 19:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep {{sofixit}} we don't remove stubs on actual regions. — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 20:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and expand by filling in blank sections. However, there is enough here worthy to be kept. Capitalistroadster 02:28, 6 March 2006 (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.