Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Musa River


 * 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. To the nominator, please include an edit summary in future deletion nominations. Geschichte (talk) 11:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Musa River

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The reason I have nominated this article for deletion is it does not cite any sources and the place itself doesn't seem to have any clear and reliable sources on the internet. Albatroxide (talk) 11:09, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Rationale appears to be correct, since a Google search reveals that this river does not have much coverage other than obscure, unsecure sites. Philosophy2 (talk) 11:14, 8 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Comment : A 1993 Papua New Guinea Conservation Needs Assessment contains this description, citing an earlier study by Taylor (1957). Indication of an offline Appraisal of the geology of the Musa River Hydro-Electric Scheme (1969) can also be found: . AllyD (talk) 11:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC) Changed comment to keep following 's changes and identification of further sources: one for improvement through normal editing. AllyD (talk) 14:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Its certainly untrue that this river has no reliable sources.  It appears in detail on US Government prepared maps of PNG (e.g. ). I added a few cites, much more could be done but its not as easy as writing about Jpop for sure.  This AFD reminds me a bit of the recent AFD at Articles for deletion/Nakunta River (2nd nomination) where I did some work to improve the article.  Rivers like this are important regionally but are located in remote third-world areas without any real internet coverage.--Milowent • hasspoken  20:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Here is another:The Geology of the Musa River Area, Papua. MB 00:35, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per the sources identified by others.--TimK MSI (talk) 13:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep sources added since deletion nomination establish notability. NemesisAT (talk) 20:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep sourcing appears enough to meet geographic notability. Star   Mississippi  20:14, 9 December 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.