Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadir, United States Virgin Islands


 * 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.  

Nadir, United States Virgin Islands
The result was KEEP per WP:SNOW (non-admin close). Sean MD80 talk 01:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable. Niaz (Talk •  Contribs)  13:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't have any problem to accept that this village is notable. But, based on what? Your statement. But WP doesn't allow them. Go through the very first line of WP:V. Add some citations that verify its notability. Hope that will work. Cheers -- Niaz  (Talk •  Contribs)  15:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Per Articles for deletion/Common outcomes, "Cities and villages are acceptable, regardless of size." Keep. A  ecis Brievenbus 13:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per long standing consensus that villages are inherently notable. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 13:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nominator has no understanding of site policies. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Settlement is more likely called "Estate Nadir" after a former plantation (my guess) in that part of the island: http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=%22estate+nadir%22. There are no sources which refer to it only as "Nadir, St. Thomas" and there are very few that talk about "Estate Nadir" itself. Article should probably be moved if other concur. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 14:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Articles for deletion/Common outcomes Villages are inherently notable. 131.44.121.252 (talk) 15:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC) (User:BQZip01)
 * comment. Google maps does bring up a location, at the bottom of Nadir Hill Road south of Mariendal: will the nominator withdraw? --Paularblaster (talk) 16:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per source added and longstanding consensus on WP:Inherent notability of well-defined places and locations. Alansohn (talk) 17:01, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - AfD is NOT a place to go to ask for article improvement. It's a blatant misuse of the vehicle.  If you feel like it needs sources, tag it with cite sources, or go to a WikiProject and ask for help, or quick go on Google to find one. matt91486 (talk) 17:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong, speedy keep. The nominator is being extremely unhelpful by nominating for deletion a series of articles on real places, simply because they have just been started (within an hour and a half of nomination) and I had not yet got around to adding further details - including references - which I planned to do today once I was awake and had a work break (and as I am currently in the process of doing). The nomination of brand new articles on communities is extremely unhelpful - I would advise the nominator to look for other things to busy him/herself with. Grutness...wha?  23:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Now obvious snowball keep AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2008 (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.