Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donbeh-ye Nasrollah


 * 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. ✗ plicit  01:27, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Donbeh-ye Nasrollah

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GEOLAND:

See Special:Permalink/1016886834 for more information. 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * You might like to tell people what "توضيح : كليه اطلاعات در آباديهاي 3 خانوار و كمتر به منظور حفظ محرمانگي با علامت * مشخص شده اند" means and how it relates to the spreadsheet row for this place being all asterisks. Uncle G (talk) 17:18, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Google translate renders this as "Explanation: All information in settlements of 3 or less families is marked with * to maintain confidentiality." FOARP (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Google Translate is what gets one the likes of "Locust Water" for . &#9786;  Uncle G (talk) 19:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Translation of the Farsi text: " "
 * In the 2006 census all ābādīs with less than 3 families (whether inhabited or uninhabited) were marked with *, but in more recent censuses such as the 2016 census, abandoned ābādīs (i.e., those with exactly zero population) have been marked with 0, because confidentiality does not make sense for an abandoned ābādī (no concerns about robbery, for example). This particular ābādī is completely uninhabited and abandoned according to the 2016 census. Ctrl+F "109930" here. 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - No evidence of legal recognition required by WP:GEOLAND for an presumed pass, applying GNG fails this as well due to lack of evidenced WP:SIGCOV. FOARP (talk) 18:06, 9 April 2021 (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.