Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Desa Tebrau


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Desa Tebrau

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Moving to AfD from CSD. If the township is real it probably is notable, but I can't confirm this pages veracity. I also don't know enough about Malaysia to tell if it's actually a political entity or just a development. I take no position. -- Selket Talk 18:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. It appears to be a development, rather than a town or village, but this information will probably never be verifiable in the near future. BurtAlert (talk) 19:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:27, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. The Google News archive search link above seems to show that this is a notable developement, but, as it stands, the article has no non-promotional content worth keeping. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep per google news. see no harm in keeping it.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:NOHARM is not a valid reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 03:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment – Most of the article was a copyvio of and  and . I have removed the copyvio.   ttonyb  (talk) 23:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:V. No sources = no article.  Sandstein   05:58, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete gnews confirms this is a private development not a locality "Taman Desa Tebrau project developed by Plenitude". there is no indepth coverage to demonstrate its notability. LibStar (talk) 07:39, 11 April 2011 (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.