Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quartino


 * 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. Consensus at this page is for restoring the village article. Should that article, in turn, be nominated for deletion or redirect, further discussion can take place. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Quartino

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

dab-page pointing nowhere The Banner talk 21:35, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. The page started out as an article about the village. An editor turned it into a dab page in 2010. Since villages are notable, why not turn the page back into a geo stub? • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Restore to village stub, with a hatnote to E-flat clarinet. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as stub on the village, with hatnote to clarinet (and to any future article about caraffe sizes...?) Pam  D  12:46, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to keep as disambiguation. If there is sufficient verifiable and encyclopedic content for an article, it should probably be titled Quartino, Ticino or Quartino (Ticino) following the naming conventions for the locale. It may be worth noting that neither German nor Italian wikipedias have an article of the hamlet. If this is deleted, it should be redirected to E-flat clarinet with a hatnote there to either Magadino or Gambarogno. older ≠ wiser 12:55, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Keep 2 valid entries. No clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. But also restore article at Quartino, Ticino or Quartino (Ticino), as suggested by Bkonrad. Boleyn (talk) 20:27, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep concur with Bkonrad, Boleyn, 2 valid entries, no obvious primary, a valid DAB. Saying that, the village could live here per PamD. To tip it I added a person = 3 entries (and another nice photo) Widefox ; talk 23:14, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I am baffled and delighted by this development that I did not expect at all! The Banner talk 00:04, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Revert per Gene93k to an article on the village. This is nonsense. --BDD (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. For those suggesting this revert to an article on the village, please indicate what verifiable source(s) be used as the basis for the article. As I indicated previously, the German and Italian language wikipedias don't have an article on the place, suggesting there might not be sufficient material for standalone article. older ≠ wiser 21:30, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Populated places are automatically notable (WP:GEOLAND, WP:NPLACE). It's never going to be an FA, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be an article. As for sources, you needn't look further than the Magadino article. The Historical Dictionary of Switzerland has us covered (French, German, Italian). --BDD (talk) 22:40, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Your notable populated place is good enough for a redirect. I suggest that we leave it in the present state as a worthy disambiguation page and close this AfD as keep. The Banner talk 23:13, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Huh. I really thought you were being sarcastic above. --BDD (talk) 23:16, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Not every populated place automatically merits an article. Many are redirects to an article about a larger community, such that rather than a one-sentence article saying that a place exists, there is a redirect to an article that might have the same sentence along with additional context. For example, even the source that you cite only mentions Quartino in the context of an article about Magadino. older ≠ wiser 01:43, 3 August 2013 (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.