Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domaine Ylang Ylang (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 no consensus‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. No new comments since the last relisting so, like the first AFD, I'm closing this discussion as No consensus. Let's not see this article back for a third AFD for a year, how does that sound? Liz Read! Talk! 01:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Domaine Ylang Ylang
AfDs for this article:


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

Fails to have enough coverage in references, so does not pass WP:NORG or WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  01:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Companies,  and Mauritius. UtherSRG (talk) 11:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Before you jump the gun and delete it which appears to be your specislisation, I suggest you give this plant the time to grow and for it to be properly documented. Thank you. Stockbroker369 (talk) 12:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 11:42, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This is not a food, drink place LOL. This is a famous Domaine in Mauritius, close to Mahebourg. Stockbroker369 (talk) 11:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * We'd maybe look at CORP notability. Oaktree b (talk) 12:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: The sources identified by Rosguill in the last AfD seem to be enough to keep the article (I'm not listing them here, they can be seen by clicking on the prior AfD in the box at the right). That editor's analysis is fine. Oaktree b (talk) 12:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I would accept draftification as an WP:ATD since appropriate references have not been added since the previous AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @UtherSRG, how about you add the sources yourself instead?  Wikipedia is not a game of Mother, May I?  Articles do not need to get sent back to the beginning just because someone didn't follow the directions perfectly.  It would probably take you less time to copy and paste those sources over than has already been spent in this AFD.
 * There isn't actually a requirement in any policy or guideline to cite sources. Our rule is that a subject can qualify for a separate article if sources exist in the real world, even if none are cited in the article.  As a long-term project, if you want to be able to delete or hide articles because they don't contain at least one source, then I suggest that you propose that.  There was some effort to extended WP:BLPPROD rules to all articles earlier this year.  The consensus went the other way, but perhaps if you read that discussion, you'd be able to find a path forward towards your goal. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:22, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion, but I see no reason to change my course. Good day. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: It is possible that this is heading toward a consensus to keep the article. Please comment on the sources raised in the previous AFD and whether the subject meets the general notability guidelines or WP:NCORP. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Malinaccier ( talk ) 01:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: This is an interesting article. It would be to your advantage if you could add a couple of more inline sources.  Preferably in the first two paragraphs. Also images need to have the description on them like I just added.  — Maile  (talk) 03:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.