Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talke (ward)


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 00:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Talke (ward)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article has been unsourced since 2006. Notability of topic is in question. Coin945 (talk) 05:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coin945 (talk) 05:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2021 April 13.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 05:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep, the nominator does not propose a valid WP:DEL-REASON. The nominator does not say which notability guideline this article fails to meet. SailingInABathTub (talk) 10:29, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * . Uncle G (talk) 11:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per the source provided above being incorporated into the article, and lack of other rationale in nomination. jp×g 07:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete sure, it exists, but how is it notable?--Rusf10 (talk) 21:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GEOLAND its a legally recognized places though I'd consider merging to Talke.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:42, 15 April 2021 (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.