Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamparomas


 * 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.  A r k y a n  &#149; (talk) 21:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Pamparomas


Article provides almost no content other than that it is a village in Peru. BlackBear 21:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I say you should give sometime, maybe in a couple of months if it still has no new info...delete it. But do not just delete it because it has little to no info. In fact if it weren't for this article I wouldn't have even known about the place. I think you should give this article sometime. Some of these articles probably started out like this.

rgoodermote 17:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that I probably wouldn't have known about the place, but people really should publish the article with information instead of changing it while they go. I could just db-empty it right now, and it would be gone. BlackBear 21:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I agree some what but I never said the person who made was going to come back. If you feel though that it is a bad thing then you go ahead and think that. But I believe that this should not be deleted....probably already has been....this article if completed could be a good thing. I am not a good editor so it would not be wise for me to do any of the editing. But I think that if other editors were to find out about this they would contribute to it. Give it time, why not remove the delete proposal and wait. If in a few months nothing happens...I will eat my words and propose the deletion myself.

P.S. Please do space out these messages instead of having them hug mine, thank you

rgoodermote 17:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete No information. No claim of notability. Userify? -- Ben 23:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Past precedent has determined that all named population centers are notable. A quick google search shows plenty of sources. --Daniel J. Leivick 23:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep it has been consistently held here, and stated inall discussions of guidelines, that individual named settlements are notable, regardless of size, or country, as long as there are sources to give it a name and location. It can remain a stub until somebody adds to it. DGG 03:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I say: keep. Originally put up as an article to be able to disambiguate between district and city with the same name. Now extended by adding infobox, location information and external link to official website. More is likely to follow as with all other villages/towns/cities in the PeruProject. Just by being there lowers the threshold to add information by other people than the creator of the article. -- Ericbronder 20:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I wasn't aware of the precedent. Thanks, guys. -- Ben 20:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ericbronder. Suriel1981 23:37, 31 March 2007 (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.