Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poovaipalayam


 * 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. Joyous! | Talk 15:07, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Poovaipalayam

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poovaipalayam is a village near Vedasandur in Tamil Nadu (source). It is so small that it does not figure in the 2001 census; the demographics section is a remnant of the copy/paste edit that created this article. There are many villages in the state, and I don't believe this one is notable enough. The source I listed above is one of only three I could find (see here); even then, the village is only briefly mentioned among many others. — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 18:47, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep There are many villages all over the world, and we keep articles on them if they can be shown to exist even if they have a much smaller population than 700. What is so special about Tamil Nadu that we should treat villages there any differently? 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:55, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, the 700 figure appears to be unsourced, originating in the statement "population: approx. 700 in 2009" by the creator of the article. Also, I suggest you read WP:GNG and other parts of that guideline. — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 21:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low, per WP:GEOLAND. (I once came across an article about a village in Poland with one inhabitant - notable? yes.) Narky Blert (talk) 00:44, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Poovaipalayam does not appear to be legally recognised. I searched for it in the 2011 census list of villages, but the village did not come up. — Sunnya343&#9992; (háblame • my work) 01:47, 29 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Returned another reference at . Badly written article, but probably can be improved rather than deleting. PierceBrosnan007 (talk) 13:42, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 07:39, 5 November 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:08, 9 November 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:31, 17 November 2016 (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.