Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mtevandidi


 * 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The result was nomination withdrawn, article kept. Doesn't really matter who closes it. ~Amatulić (talk) 03:32, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Mtevandidi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not conform to Wikipedia standards: huge problems with formatting, requires lots of work before achieving a reasonable standard. in the current form it should not show in the main namespace. Deletion or Incubation/Userfication.  kashmiri TALK  16:48, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

*Delete: The article is a mess. Fails WP:GNG.
 * Keep in view of 's edits. The article is pretty good now. Wikicology (talk) 22:35, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organisms-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. The topic is that of a reasonably well known wine grape from the country of Georgia. The grape does have a couple of reasonable hits in Google Scholar. The article is a horrible mess, and should be stubbified in the same way any other wine grape article starts out (see how Plavac Mali or Dobricic got started, for example), but the topic should remain. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:00, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I just went through the article and shortened it significantly, removing unnecessary details, unformatted data tables, and other irrelevant cruft, did some formatting and broke up the article into logical sections. Much work still remains, but at least the article is now readable and informative. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:22, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - withdrawing nomination in view of 's recent edits. Adding a few maintenance tags, though. Thanks!  kashmiri TALK  22:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * For procedural reasons, 's nod to keep is needed before I could close this discussion (as normal withdrawal or Speedy keep).  kashmiri TALK  22:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * thank you so much . Now you have my nod as Keep. I appreciated the ping. I never kept the page and this discussion on my watch. Had it been I did, I would have been very much aware of the of the article improvement. also a big thanks to for the great work on it. Wikicology (talk) 22:54, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * SNOW keep. No need to leave this open. --Sammy1339 (talk) 02:39, 7 October 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.