Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Ghabisiyya


 * 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The result was nomination withdrawn. MER-C 01:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Al-Ghabisiyya

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Village of 690 people at its peak that apparently no longer exists; unsourced article asserts no reason for its notability. Is perhaps POV-pushing, given this article, which links to articles about another couple of dozen similarly non-notable villages. TedFrank 12:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep the reason it no longer exists (if indeed it doesn't) is the very fact of its notability - it was seized by Israel in the 1948 war. Also, I don't see any POV in the related article, unless the nom can point out inaccuracies? Eliminator JR  Talk  13:04, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, not trying to comment on the notability of this town I can't fail to notice that this article has no secondary sources. Without them it blatantly fails WP:A. If this article is to be kept it should be sourced and referenced Alf Photoman  13:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is easily sourced.  Moreover, there is an interesting story of what happened there during 1948-1950 which is not mentioned on the page at the moment.  I can add this with a good source in the next few days. --Zerotalk 13:44, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Good source given, though I agree it is POV-pushing; never hard to do with such a topic.  Springnuts 14:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment You could equally argue that deleting the nominated article is also POV pushing, though - as you say it is a difficult subject.  Eliminator JR  Talk  16:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Clearly the notability is in why it no longer exists. Would not be opposed to a redirect to a article of similar villages if that is a preferred approach. --Kevin Murray 18:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If it had a population of 690, then that's 690 reasons to keep this article. Would be opposed to a redirect to a article of similar villages if that is a preferred approach. Punkmorten 19:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Punkmorten Alf Photoman  23:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Now that WP:A has been satisfied, I withdraw the nomination, though I question whether every village in the main list merits a Wikipedia entry. -- TedFrank 00:23, 18 March 2007 (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.