Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Koprivna, Oštra Luka


 * 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 keep. Hog Farm Talk 06:50, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Koprivna, Oštra Luka

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable village. Doesn't meet with WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND guideline. References are not reliable. No notability. ➤  Tajwar – thesupermaN! 【Click to Discuss】  11:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. ➤  Tajwar – thesupermaN!  【Click to Discuss】  11:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bosnia and Herzegovina-related deletion discussions. ➤  Tajwar – thesupermaN!  【Click to Discuss】  11:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Honesty and with respect, this nomination seems to me like a waste of time. The village is "Populated, legally recognized place" and is as such presumed to be notable. Even abandoned places are considered notable and often places without legal recognition. Here we have officially recognized settlement with over 500 inhabitants (per the 2013 census, and I have no idea why Tajwar claims that the official census data is unreliable source).--MirkoS18 (talk) 12:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, meets WP:V. Geschichte (talk) 18:17, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Taj: I understand that you're relatively new around here. However, this is one of multiple frivolous nominations that you've brought to AfD recently. There are many various notability guidelines, and many are complex; I urge that you give a thorough read of the respective WP:SNGs, which can be found at Category:, before you do more nominations that are, quite frankly, wastes of time. This locale is a legally regocnized populated place, meaning it passes WP:GEOLAND. Curbon7 (talk) 21:20, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep yet another mundane gazetteer entry per WP:5P1. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 18:24, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly a recognised settlement per WP:GEOLAND. May I respectfully suggest that the nominator familiarises himself with Wikipedia notability guidelines before nominating anything else for deletion. On the strength of current nominations, he doesn't have a great deal of familiarity with them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:44, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GEOLAND.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:48, 3 October 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.