Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sakthikulangara


 * 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 closing as speedy keep. Nominator's comments at User talk:Mike Rosoft, plus WP:SNOW seem to be sufficient indication that this can safely be closed early. Non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Sakthikulangara

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Possible importance but limited content and context, with no indication of significance. Article can be retained if expanded. Ajayupai95 (talk) 06:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Villages are generally notable, as long as reliable sources exist. In fact, this article is better than the most pages about villages of India; the village has its website, which can be used to expand the article. (The original version of the article was copied from the website.) Keep. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:51, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as norm for settled places. AllyD (talk) 07:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep, genuine places are considered notable. We really ought to have a 'Village' template which contains some wording about this to save AfD time. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:49, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per precedent. — Theopolisme ( talk )  15:50, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:15, 18 February 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.