Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artanada


 * 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) Natg 19 (talk) 01:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Artanada

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This, as with many similar stub articles created by this user, is a blatant notability fail. The 'town' is just a name on the map - it is impossible to find any sources on it, if it even existed. LegesRomanorum (talk) 13:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 17:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 17:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep obviously. The nominator is on a misguided crusade about notability. The nominator says "it is impossible to find any sources on it". There are numerous secondary sources to the town's existence: including Pleiades and the sources cited in the article. A town still being written about over a thousand years later is clearly notable. In addition, Google Scholar has may articles about the excavations and other archaeology done there . Clearly the nominator hasn't read WP:BEFORE and seems to ignore that being a gazetteer is the first of the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. I'm not going to go through this effort for each of the nominations this user has made below as the effort is not worth keeping articles if the community doesn't want to but suffice to say that according to WP:BEFORE these are the efforts the nominator should have gone through before nominating. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful for readers to be able to identify, distinguish, and locate ancient Greek and Roman towns and villages. There may not currently be a lot of information or sources in the article, but even as they stand they're helpful articles about geographic places that readers might run across in various sources (including epigraphic ones), and all of them have at least one reliable source (and some of them several).  Many of them could be expanded with known, existing sources; all have the potential to be expanded in the future, but even as stubs they have value.  There's also a discussion about a related series of proposed deletions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome.  P Aculeius (talk) 22:56, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Plenty of mentions on Google Books and plenty of in-depth coverage of archaeology on Google Scholar. Mccapra (talk) 03:15, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Significantly covered here. Clearly not "impossible to find any sources." SportingFlyer  T · C  06:18, 22 May 2020 (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.