Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thengana

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. The Evil Spartan (talk) 01:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thengana

Seems like some kind of place or community, I was going to prod it, but I know it will be removed, so placing here instead. I couldn't find any information that it exists, even on a map, fails WP:V Delete Secret ^account 21:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- It just got proved that it exists, no opinion now, Secret ^account 18:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ - I was able to come up with very little on Google Maps with nothing else to be found with several other searches. These place entries are part of Google Maps “community maps” feature and, as such, are unverifiable. —Travis ^talk 21:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that in the aerial view above, there doesn’t appear to be anything resembling a bank, hospital, nursing home, or other large building. —Travis ^talk 21:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Okay, a search on Google India turned up this thoroughly-annotated map of the area. I have yet to find a single official map, however, that includes Thengana. —Travis ^talk 15:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 03:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A simple Google search confirms that it exists and has schools and hospitals. Wouldn't it be less work to do that search rather than nominate for AfD? Phil Bridger (talk) 22:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The article before didn't tell that info, someone cleanup, but while looking at the sources carefully, it seems like a chunk of the google hits are the hospital, which it's name is Thengana. Secret ^account 00:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I spent 20-30 minutes researching this topic - I’m a bit of a map nut anyway - and the best I came up with is posted above. After another 15 minutes or so tonight, I found this map, which shows a place called Thanganal. Google maps, however, has no entries for that name, and Google only turns up only two India-related hits. Between Google and several other searches, I still can’t find enough information to change my opinion. Maybe someone familiar with Southwestern India can shed some light on this. In the mean time, I’d like to suggest that you please assume good faith on the part of the nominator. Regards —Travis^talk 00:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I’ll also add that I’m loathe to recommend deletion of any village, town, city, or other populated place, but I have found nothing to prove that this is an actual incorporated, government-recognized place. —Travis ^talk 03:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There are plenty of references in the Google search results linked above which refer to Thengana as a location. For example the Kerala Yellow Pages refers to an entry being in Thengana; The Hindu says that the Lourdes English School is in Thengana; a hospital directory says that the Thengana Medical Mission Hospital is in Thengana; an estate agent is selling property in Thengana; The Hindu says that a state minister spoke at a campaign meeting in Thengana. I don't think that there can be any doubt that this place exists - The Hindu in particular is pretty much the gold standard in reliable sources - and existing is usually considered to be enough to keep an article on a populated place. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It is a small town in Kottayam District. The statement is true. But the question is that, do we really need all that information like an yellow page? (check Wikipedia is not a directory). --Avinesh Jose T 10:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As a practical matter all villages are considered notable. A sufficient justification for this is to avoid afds over all the hundreds of thousands of them individually. Additionally, there will always be information. But in practice, we need some conventions of this sort, to be able to have time to actually edit WP and discuss the articles needing discussion. I wish we had more of them, either one way or the other, both for notable and for non-notable.DGG (talk) 00:30, 18 January 2008 (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.