Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paşakonağı, Düzce


 * 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. ✗ plicit  01:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Paşakonağı, Düzce

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

Several previous discussions   support redirecting Turkish village stubs to the District article if they are sourced only to Koyumuz. However, these two redirects were reverted because they have a second source which briefly mentions them being populated by Kurds. I believe that this passing mention is insufficient to justify a standalone article, therefore I propose that Yenitaşköprü and Paşakonağı be redirected to Düzce district. (I had proposed these at WP:RfD and was, well, redirected here because this is a question of whether or not a standalone article should exist.) –dlthewave ☎ 22:58, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 22:58, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 22:58, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect - Per consensus in previous Mahalle discussion, and a WP:TROUT to whoever reverted the redirect. Kurds live in many places all across Turkey (and outside Turkey). FOARP (talk) 08:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Question If I drop a few (reliable) sources that even briefly mention the existence of this, can it stay per GEOLAND? ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 12:59, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Scrap the question, Speedy keep per GEOLAND. Paşakonağı: . Yenitaşköprü:, , . Both: , . The final two also mention Bahçeköy, which also has been converted into a redirect by . Similar sources about that village exist as well , so I'm reverting that back. ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 13:14, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Styyx - These are all at best just bare mentions of Paşakonağı. The entire reason why these Mahalle articles were redirected to the district level (in a very well attended discussion) is because of lack of significant coverage such as would allow you to actually write an article about them. DLthewave is acting on a clear, pre-existing consensus that Mahalle that lacked any significant coverage should just be redirected to district level. FOARP (talk) 16:50, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Barely even took me 15 minutes to write 4-5 sentences with the sources. It isn't that hard is it? ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 17:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Also noting that we are not discussing a "mahalle" but a "köy". The mahalle thing only exists in metropolitan municipalities. Erzurum (the province home to the whole "previous consensus" you're saying) is metropolitan municipality, Düzce, literally the newest province of Turkey, is not. ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 17:45, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * These new sources don't actually say anything about Paşakonağı. This source doesn't mention Paşakonağı. This source only mentions Paşakonağı once ("With the warming of the weather, animal breeders started to release their animals to the pastures. Buffaloes, which are concentrated in Bahçeköy, Paşakonağı and Yenitaşköprü villages of Düzce, were released into the pastures.") This source doesn't mention Paşakonağı. The real topic of all three articles is Düzce, so this is an excellent argument for redirecting there. FOARP (talk) 09:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Bruh moment. Perhaps check the article? First you say that the only source is the unreliable Köyümüz (fair enough), so I expand the article with sources online and now you claim they don't mention Paşakonağı, even tough I added them in the article with text? The first one mentions it as "Paşa konağı", the last one does at the bottom. ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 09:40, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per the excellent expansion work that has been done.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 18:43, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Really? The sources don't actually say anything about Paşakonağı. FOARP (talk) 09:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, really. Please WP:AGF.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 11:27, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. The sources that were added are barely passing mentions. There needs to be significant coverage from reliable sources to show notability. I'm not seeing it. -- Mike 🗩 14:46, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Please realize that Yenitaşköprü has a school regulated by the Ministry of National Education. ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 15:09, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Yenitaşköprü is not the subject of this article, 2) that makes the school an official state school, it does not mean there is anything that can really be written about this topic, which was the reason why the Mahalle articles (which are ultimately the same level as a koy) were all redirected to district-level unless there was some significant coverage of them. The real topic of all this coverage is Düzce anyway. 3) I know you're trying for a WP:GEOLAND#1 pass here, but the issue here is that even if they do pass that guide, the subject is better covered at the district-level (per the previous AFD), because there is nothing really to write about the place in terms of significant coverage. FOARP (talk) 15:27, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * See the top of this page: both Paşakonağı and Yenitaşköprü are discussed in this nomination. The latter passes GEOLAND#1 with the school. Your reasoning of "nothing to write about" is quite weak as I've managed to write things about geography, economy and education in the article with the sources above. ~Styyx Talk? ^-^ 16:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. Both would certainly appear to be recognised settlements. I see no good reason for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:03, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - as per Users Styx and Necrothesp. Acceptably expanded, and in any case there is nothing wrong with geostubs as long as there are the sources showing that the places exist as recognised settlements. Ingratis (talk) 02:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep clearly passes GEOLAND. SportingFlyer  T · C  01:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GEOLAND.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:12, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep (nom) - In my opinion both articles have been expanded with reliable sources to the point that a redirect is no longer necessary. Not a candidate for speedy keep/snow close since there are delete/redirect !votes, but I think the consensus is clear. –dlthewave ☎ 18:13, 19 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.