Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ab Malakh


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) FOARP (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Ab Malakh

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GEOLAND:

Its population has been reported 75 people in 32 families in the 2016 census. Ctrl+F "175941" here. But the population had been reported only 5 people in 4 families in the 2011 census; Ctrl+F the same number here. It may be a village, because the number of families is above the threshold (100 people or 20 families) for village recognition in Iran, but it is not probable because apparently people have been attracted to this place only recently.

See Special:Permalink/1016886834 for more information. 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - The waterfall certainly appears to exist. This article appears to confirm that there is also a village at that location. This article about it also appears to be WP:SIGCOV. Just about gets over the line for WP:GNG, but only for the waterfall, not for the village. BTW - me voting keep in this doesn't mean I don't think we should just delete all of C46's stub articles - the existence of a few saveable articles out of thousands is not proof of anything. I think the best thing to do is delete all per WP:TNT. 4nn1l2 - I'd also like to go and see these waterfalls! FOARP (talk) 18:54, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The waterfall is certainly notable. It even has a nice article on fawiki: fa:آبشار آب ملخ, but why the ābādi? Settlements have been named after the waterfall, not vice versa. 4nn1l2 (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So why can we not take the poor translation out, fix the first sentence, and make this about Locust Waterfall (or even ab Malakh Waterfall) instead of about "Locust Water"? Is there enough source material on the waterfall? Uncle G (talk) 19:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Seems like an uncontroversial move to me. FOARP (talk) 20:10, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I would say yes, there are enough reliable sources regarding the waterfall, mostly in Farsi, such as Iran newspaper, Etemad, Hamshahri, etc. 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I've added these sources to the article and moved it to Ab Malakh waterfalls (plural waterfalls because there is more than one) - I know this AFD is still open but no need to stand on ceremony. 4nn1l2, you OK with withdrawing the AFD nomination now? This can be done because there have been no delete !votes.
 * As a general note this shows why these stubs are bad - the person who added the detail about the waterfalls to this article might well have created an article about the waterfalls (the only notable thing about Ab Malakh) had the stub not existed, but because the stub exists it was simply added as a minor note. FOARP (talk) 10:45, 10 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Withdraw as the nature of the page has been changed (from abadi to waterfalls). 4nn1l2 (talk) 10:57, 10 April 2021 (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.