Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Falevai


 * 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  Speedy keep. Real place, sourced. Nominator may not be aware of the reasons by which we have articles for places. &mdash; Maggot Syn 11:00, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Falevai

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No assertion of notability Ged UK (talk) 10:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, a real, verifiable, inhabited location. No assertion of notability is not in itself a sufficient reason for deletion.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC).
 * Keep - Places are automatically notable. This article lists a source as well.  TN ‑ X - Man  11:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, settlements are inherently notable, per WP:NPT -- Ratarsed (talk) 11:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep All geographical locations are notable. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  13:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:43, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, real places verified to exist are inherently notable. J I P  | Talk 18:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Settlements are inherently notable, and this one certainly exists. It'd be good if the confusion regarding the name of the island where the village is located was also clarified. Is it Kapa/Kapu, Falevai or both? Nsk92 (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2008 (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.