Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mogilivaripalli


 * 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. This stub has been improved enough for inclusion. Bearian (talk) 14:02, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Mogilivaripalli

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Reason was "Non notable geographic location" Fiddle   Faddle  10:57, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. A quick Google search shows that Mogilivaripalli is a verifiable village. Wikipedia generally keeps settlements. • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep for the above reason.Eustachiusz (talk) 18:28, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔  02:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)


 * The notability of geographic locations is complicated by the fact that Wikipedia isn't just an encyclopaediait's also an almanac and, importantly for this, a gazetteer (see the five pillars). This means that geographic locations that are verifiable and reasonably prominent typically get their own article.  In practice the definition of "reasonably prominent" is the sticking point. I've always felt that a good objective test for a geographical location is whether it's named on a 1:50,000 scale map.  That tends to mean most villages and trunk roads, most decent-sized forests and prominent mountains, get an entry, but generally stops people from starting an article about their house or the street they live in.— S Marshall  T/C 11:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete in it's current form it's (a) not in English and (b) entirely unsupported by reliable sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:33, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete (revised below). The village may or may not be a notable location for Wikipedia, but this entirely non-English article doesn't belong in the English Wikipedia.  Unician &nabla; 07:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm also concerned that, aside from address and telephone number information at the end, almost the entire text of this article is in the form of included PDF files which cannot be edited by other contributors. This seems to pose an unreasonable and unnecessary obstacle to collaboration.  Unician &nabla; 23:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Clearly, if we can't read it, we don't know whether there are reliable sources. All we know is there are no footnotes (which is an entirely different thing).  The fact that the material isn't in English means we need to make a judgment whether to translate it or delete it, and that judgment should be made by someone who can read it.  I would imagine someone from  WikiProject India/Members would be able to help with that.— S Marshall  T/C 08:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The treatment of articles for not being in English is covered at WP:Pages needing translation into English. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:03, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I've listed it at WP:PNT and this allows it two weeks to be translated (not sure how large the Telugu-speaking Wiki community is) before being deleted. But there is no doubt from its Google results that it's a genuine village of c 2,000 people, which is more than large enough to warrant an article. Eustachiusz (talk) 11:22, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep, in its new form. Since the content consisted entirely of a picture of text, and contact information that the author had spammed into a couple of existing articles as well, I replaced it all with a stub&#8212;with a reference for verification. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - seems like a good solution. Eustachiusz (talk) 11:27, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, revising my earlier request, above. In the course of cleaning up the article, all of the old content has been removed, and the new content is a good start.  Thanks, Largo Plazo!  Unician &nabla; 20:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Appears to meet our criteria for notability. Certainly larger than many villages in the UK which are already covered by Wikipedia. RomanSpa (talk) 10:38, 21 May 2014 (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.