Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capel Dewi


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 22:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Capel Dewi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contains purely redlink. Weihang7 (talk) 13:00, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment As the dab page creator I can't vote, but maybe waiting less than half an hour to place a deletion tag on this article seems a little bit hasty. Before the end of the day all three red links now have articles, which was always my intention. Please give editors a chance to see things through; I do have a mail page you could use. FruitMonkey (talk) 23:04, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Page was nominated by new user who seems well intentioned but knows little about wikipedia policies: he also removed a PROD notice for the article listed directly above, clearly non-notable if one knows anything about the subject, as the rapid close of the debate shows.TheLongTone (talk) 20:26, 23 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep There are, however, articles linked to Capel Dewi.TheLongTone (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - yes, and further there is no doubt at all that the hamlets listed are real places, so given Wikipedia's gazetteer function, those pages if created will certainly be kept, and this page should be also. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:59, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Capel Dewi, Carmarthenshire17:23, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:14, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:14, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Clearly. -- Necrothesp (talk) 00:31, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, of course. But even if they were all redlinks, would probably be worth keeping in an IAR-ish way, to distinguish between three locations, all potential articles. Pam  D  17:54, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep another ill-informed disruptive nomination. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:09, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Whatever its status when nominated. This is now a properly constrcuted DAB page.  I susopect that this is a case of premature nomination of a page under construction.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:33, 27 December 2012 (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.