Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baicang


 * 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   delete. WP:SOFTDELETE. If sources can be found that pass WP:V, then restoration can be done. The Bushranger One ping only 00:20, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Baicang

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No Chinese language information, and futile search in Google Maps/Earth along a 55-km northeast-southwest corridor along China National Highway 109 which is south of the lake of Nam Co as advertised or in a 1.5-mi radius of Nyingzhong Township (宁中乡); no matches in the PRC National Bureau of Statistics' most recent database of villages in Damxung County, which all auto-generated (i.e. influenced by this article) results in a Google search (minus Wiki) claim this locale is in. Per WP:NGEO, the lack of proof for this locale's (former) existence, is grounds for deletion. GotR Talk 19:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

It exists, but the likelihood is that it has changed name. I'm happy to db-author it. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  20:01, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: There's a settlement at the location visible in this satellite image . Ryan Vesey 20:04, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Could be Baling village? "Cang" could easily be a mistranslation of cun which means village.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  20:09, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to db-author it but other people have edited it so I don't think I can do it. I agree it should be deleted as as Baicang it simply isn't supportable with sources.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  16:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. -- Cameron11598  (Converse) 00:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:01, 26 January 2013 (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.