Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Selkirk, Manitoba


 * 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   speedy close. Nomination is clearly based on an abject misunderstanding of what being a city even means, and no prospect of deletion exists whatsoever. Bearcat (talk) 15:18, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Selkirk, Manitoba

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Selkirk Manitoba is Not notable — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autistic editor (talk • contribs) 11:53, 3 June 2016‎
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.   Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   11:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Delete. Not notable Because steel mills and Major Hospital Not enough to make it notable  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autistic editor (talk • contribs) 12:39, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a notable city in Canada, and the article has stood fine for 11 years.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   11:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - I'm not sure what's going on here, but WP:GEOLAND makes it very clear that "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable." GABgab 12:44, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Delete. I know but Steel mills and Major Hospitals are not enough to make it notable i checked google i had 5 results for selkirk Manitoba then it shows Selkirk ave from Winnipeg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autistic editor (talk • contribs) 12:46, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Please do not keep !voting "delete" - you are already the nominator. GABgab 12:48, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I know but The mental Health centre and Steel mills are Not enough to make it notable Autistic editor (talk) 12:49, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I recommend you read the GEOLAND policy cited above, as well as WP:N in general. As I mentioned, populated places are presumed notable by convention - including Selkirk. You may also want to look at this. Thanks. GABgab 12:51, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay so What did selkirk Do besides Steel mills To make it notable Autistic editor (talk) 12:53, 3 June 2016 (UTC) But Selkirk Manitoba Is Not Legally Recognized Unless It won Awards Autistic editor (talk) 13:02, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. Selkirk didn't need a steel mill or a hospital to be notable (although it does have them). For Wikipedia's purposes, every populated, legally recognized place is typically presumed to be notable. In other words, just being a city makes it notable. See WP:GEOLAND. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:00, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That's not how this particular notability standard works. This has been explained several times above. GABgab 13:05, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Cities are Only Legally Recognized if they won Awards Such as Transit or Beautiful Autistic editor (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Er, no, a city's legal status is not dependent on winning awards — it's dependent solely on the place's incorporated status, which is completely independent of whether some external organization granted it an award for some aspect of how it's run. "Legal recognition" of a city is granted by the government, not by non-profit organizations. Bearcat (talk) 15:18, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Okay So It won 2 times for Transit and 1 time for Beautiful So 3 wins so someone close this Discussion As Baseless


 * 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.