Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aden, Alberta


 * 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. Nom has changed vote to keep (non-admin closure) ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 18:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Aden, Alberta

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This short article was added with the assumption that it is a hamlet in Alberta. After a recent review of which settlements are actually hamlets, it was found that this community is not currently registered by Alberta as a hamlet, if it ever was. I propose that this article be deleted as it is short, and not notable. 117Avenue (talk) 23:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep all Alberta settlements below, every settlement is notable, even if not recognized as hamlet by Alberta Municipal affairs. And please don't mass nominate before investigating more in-depth, some communities are first nations/metis and not under provincial jurisdiction, some are historic/ghost towns. They are not sub-stubs, most have at least a map and geographic context, many have infoboxes, some have demographics section, some have climate data (weather network keeps updated weather conditions for these communities, why shouldn't wikipedia maintain an article?). --Qyd (talk) 02:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * While a small settlement may, if not easily referenceable, be redirected to another topic, such as a larger municipality that it's part of, no size of settlement is ever deleted from Wikipedia as being insufficiently notable. The only grounds for deleting a named settlement would be if there weren't any evidence that it even existed in the first place. If there's a viable redirect target, then consider redirecting; but otherwise, keep per Qyd. Bearcat (talk) 03:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm sorry that the nominator did all the work of creating 110 separate discussions about places in the Canadian province of Alberta, but nobody wants to write, or even to cut and paste, 110 separate responses. I see that two people did-- but I bet that they didn't really want to. Mandsford (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * No kidding! Went through all the motions nonetheless, as I wouldn't want to see articles nuked due to some technicality. --Qyd (talk) 23:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't know of any other way of doing it. 117Avenue (talk) 00:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep, with an explanation of its significance as a border crossing. 117Avenue (talk) 01:01, 11 January 2010 (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.