Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al Karmah


 * 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 Snowball keep. There is consensus that the article needs expansion, not deletion. Non-admin closure. --Blanchardb- Me • MyEars • MyMouth -timed 14:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Al Karmah

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Entire article is smaller than a sentence Sydney Know It All talk 12:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - not a valid deletion reason. It's a stub about a city - a perfectly good encyclopediac subject. - Peripitus (Talk) 13:00, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article is weak now, but the subject seems to be notable, and it would be more useful to improve the article than to delete it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to be notable enough. Harland1 (t/c) 13:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per consensus here, perhaps WP:SNOW keep, but on the contrary this needs references to prove that it's not a hoax.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 13:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Easily verifiable.--Michig (talk) 13:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Cities are inherently notable. It's a stub. There is plenty of context. No nonsense at all. Most articles are not created as good articles on the first effort. The amount of effort put forth here would have been better spent improving stubs. Dloh  cierekim  14:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, real and recognised settlements are automatically notable, and being short is not a valid reason for deletion. J Milburn (talk) 14:27, 29 December 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.