Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bakhra (2nd nomination)


 * 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. The consensus is that this article meets WP:GEOLAND based on solitary source of a government census website. Liz Read! Talk! 23:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Bakhra
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

An unsourced stub of one sentence and an infobox created by Stop snoring, who is now blocked as a sockpuppet. Fails WP:GNG. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 02:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Bihar. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 02:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:26, 12 August 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting. Some policy-based reasons for Keep or Delete woud be welcome. Just being a one sentence stub isn't grounds for deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:15, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It is a town per this reliable source. WP:GEOLAND applies. I will look for more sources later. —usernamekiran (talk) 04:16, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep This place appears to satisfy GEOLAND. Listed as a populated place in the 2011 Census. There appear to be several other villages bearing this name, so moving to a more precise title may be warranted. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:44, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete or as an ATD Redirect to List of villages in Saraiya Block of Muzaffarpur district, Bihar. Citing Wikipedia is circular (policy) and dictionary entries are included in What Wikipedia is not that is also policy. The source provided above returned "The requested page could not be found." Fails GNG per Notability (geographic features), and per WP:PLACEOUTCOMES, lacking any real coverage and certainly no significant coverage. Please note: No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists.  --  Otr500 (talk) 22:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * PLACEOUTCOMES states Populated place outcomes generally follow WP:GEOLAND, which means that they're usually kept if they either have legal recognition or can be shown to meet GNG through significant coverage. As I show above, this village has legal recognition through the national census and thus satisfies both GEOLAND and PLACEOUTCOMES. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:22, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Reply: Maybe you are responding to the wrong AFD. I suppose you missed the part about citing Wikipedia. Even if one was citing Wikipedia about Wikipedia it would not advance notability. However, this subject is about a village and not Wikipedia and WP:circular states: Do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether English Wikipedia or Wikipedias in other languages) as sources since Wikipedia is considered as a user-generated source. That means this is an unsourced article so cannot have "legal recognition" just because it exists. The article is tagged as needing more sources. Notability is questioned with this AFD and an article cannot be "valid" (pass any notability criteria) if it violates policies and guidelines. The actual census2011.co.in site, I think you may find, is blacklisted. -- Otr500 (talk) 03:44, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, census2011.co.in, an unofficial copier of census data, may be blacklisted, but the official site that is linked above, censusindia.gov.in, should certainly not be. Entering "Bakhra" in the search field lists five villages of that name, including this one in Muzaffarpur district, Bihar, with a population of 7998. It seems to be you who may be commenting in the wrong discussion with your reference to WP:NOTDICTIONARY. This is about a village, not a word. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If the sourcing is what your most concerned about, I've gone ahead and replaced the circular ref to a link to the official Census site. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly passes WP:GEOLAND. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:55, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. as it meets WP:GEOLAND.Zeddedm (talk) 08:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:GEOLAND a populated place. Lightburst (talk) 16:22, 25 August 2022 (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.