Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nangilickondan Village


 * 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. Populaces, regardless of size, are typically kept as long as they can be verified using a reliable source (WP:NPLACE). (non-admin closure) I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 15:12, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Nangilickondan Village

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A village isn't notable per WP:GNG. Perhaps redirect to Villupuram district Dengero (talk) 02:05, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - There's no such thing as a "not notable" village as population centers are inherently notable regardless of size. This does appear to be an actual population center with many businesses identifying their location as Nangilickondan, Tamil Nadu. Villupuram is over 40km away from Nangilickondan  and a redirect there would be totally inappropriate. --Oakshade (talk) 02:35, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 05:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd be interested in seeing which policy states that all population centers are inherently noteable. That seems rather false on it's face. Jtrainor (talk) 17:41, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * There are no notability "policies", but guidelines. However, one of the Five Pillars of Wikipedia is that it contains elements of a gazetteer.  WP:OUTCOMES demonstrates this is held fundamental.--Oakshade (talk) 23:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep As Oakshade said, verifiable villages are generally considered inherently notable per the result of numerous AfDs in the past. Sources which verify the village's existence can be found, though they mostly use the alternate spelling Nangilikondan (see here and here). The page should probably be moved to Nangilikondan, but that's not an issue to be settled at AfD. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation
 * Keep. I agree there's been considerable discussion concluding verifiable populated places are inherently notable. This discussion indicates by Snow Keep that even verifiable formerly populated places are notable. Note the keep assertion by User:DGG, and the worthy dissent by User:Uncle G. (Also note the participation in that process of everyone here, except for the nominator, no offense intended). That discussion settled the question for me for good. BusterD (talk) 12:17, 25 August 2011 (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.