Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Union councils of Pakistan


 * 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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 19:09, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Union councils of Pakistan

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article has numerous problems and has had them for years. Large tables are just copied from a government pdf. The article doesn't have a real introduction and it needs more sources to ensure WP:GNG. Attempted to PROD but it was removed. There appears to be two editors interested in this topic and cleaning up this article Pakieditor and Vice regent alt. Instead of deleting this should be sent to draft. Normally I would just send it there but there is a policy about sending articles to draft that are 90+ days old.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 19:38, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Pakistan.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 19:38, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify Send to draft so article can be brought up to quality standards and prevent it from being deleted. It appears there are editors interested in addressing these issues with the article.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 19:40, 20 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Courtesy tagging @Vice regent as they commented from their alt account.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 19:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Draftify for necessary improvements. Mccapra (talk) 20:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * At this point oppose draftify and instead prefer cleanup (meaning keep). This is an important topic and the article has the potential of being cleaned up and kept. Certainly this meets the WP:GNG guideline (sources:). Draftifying it will mean less users visit it and hence it will languish in draft space until some bot deletes it for lack of activity.VR talk 02:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as I agree with the points raised by VR. Draftifying the article poses the risk of less contributions by newer/active editors and auto-deletion by bots. Pakieditor (talk) 14:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * KEEP per VR and Pakieditor rationale. Ngrewal1 (talk) 17:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Ok then if that's what you want to do then lets work to fix this article up quickly.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 19:09, 21 August 2022 (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.