Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finnish exonyms for places in Norway: Troms


 * 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. If anyone would like to merge any of this I would be happy to userfy it to them. J04n(talk page) 10:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Finnish exonyms for places in Norway: Troms

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Similar to Articles for deletion/Finnish exonyms (Sweden), this article is essentially a list of translations from Norwegian to Finnish. Whilst it might be suitable for Norwegian and/or Finnish Wikipedia, it is unnecessary in English Wikipedia. If anyone needs to know the Finnish name for a Norwegian place, then the interwiki links on the place's article would help. It could be merged into Finnish exonyms for places in Norway, but I have also nominated that for deletion. Bazonka (talk) 10:00, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. Bazonka (talk) 10:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Bazonka (talk) 10:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment:If the decision is a keep, please look at the links Hatten is in Niedersachsen, also in Alsace, -Nasen is a charitable organisation. Now to the quiz question- do we keep. For an English researcher encountering Kolsevuopionvankka- this article is maybe the only article Google finds and this will lead through to quite a bit of information about this part of Troms. If it does go then the data needs to be transcribed through to several articles so the minority langauge is represented. Could this be c&p'd over to Wikivoyage?--ClemRutter (talk) 10:32, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've fixed all the inappropriate links, which now means that the list only has three blue links left. I really don't see the point. Bazonka (talk) 12:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Considering that Wikipedia has articles about hardly any of these Norwegian places, it's unclear to me why we would need a list of what they are called in Finnish. This is the English Wikipedia. If the Finnish Wikipedia wants this list, they can have it transwikied over to there. Some of these may not even be proper names. The exonym for Horsnesvatnet, a pond in Storfjord municipality, is "Järvi", which just means "lake" in Finnish. The exonym for Bukta, an inlet at sea in the same municipality, is "Lahti", which just means "bay" in Finnish. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep "Considering that Wikipedia has articles about hardly any of these Norwegian places, it's unclear to me why we would need a list of what they are called in Finnish." is the sort of view why wikipedia has grown so unevenly. That we do not have articles on most of them does not mean they are not notable or warmly appreciated here. I think this is useful for not only identifying the features but for those which have Finnish names.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  11:11, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * merge selectively. As Dt.B and I explained for the general article, that this is the English WP means that this is the WP written in English -- we cover the entire world, to the extent that  people who can write in English come here to write the articles. But some of the items listed here are places about which we should have articles, and the information should be transferred to the main list. That would include all the villages, rivers, fjords,   mountains, and  probably lakes & peninsulas. It  would not include the streams, ponds, hills, moors, marshes  and inlets. Unless it should happen that one of these is actually important, we'll never have articles on them, and more than we would if they were in England.  If we mention them in an article, we can include the local Kven or Finnish name.   DGG ( talk ) 14:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:12, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Agree with nom. No need for this on English WP as per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 22:21, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT which I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned on this debate. Dr. Blofeld keep comment is more like oh a bunch of redlinks, keep them for that, which isn't grounded in policy. Secret account 03:31, 25 February 2013 (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.