Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Umantewena

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) –Davey2010^Talk 00:35, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Umantewena

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

Very short stub article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Named settlements are presumptively notable even when their articles are terrible little sub-stubs like this one. Pilot guides to the Pacific in the 1930s and 1940s, such as this one made mention of this settlement, in part because the Roman Catholic mission there included limited hospital facilities. This is never going to be a very big article, but I see no valid cause for deletion. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:25, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOLAND. (also added a ref) -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 18:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:53, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep per above and GeoffreyT2000 has given zero rationale as per Wikipedia:Deletion policy as to why this should be deleted. "Very short stub article" is not any of the WP:DEL#REASON criteria. --Oakshade (talk) 01:39, 25 July 2015 (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.