Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whitestone, Warwickshire


 * 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 __EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Appears to meet GEOLAND per consensus. Content issues can be handled editorially. Star  Mississippi  17:48, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Whitestone, Warwickshire

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

This page is heavily unsourced, from reading a lot of WP:original research, doesn't have any historical significance and also fails WP:Notability. I propose either a deletion of the article, it merged into Nuneaton or Attleborough or it deleted altogether. It doesn't seem to be like Hawkesbury Village proposal one as this place has no manor or early history. DragonofBatley (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm really sorry, I don't think this can be deleted, despite there not being much to write about it. Per WP:GEOLAND, populated, legally-recognised places are presumed to be notable. The briefest of Google searches reveals that Whitestone has a surgery with that name, a post-office with that name, is regarded as a safe place by the Coventry Telegraph referring to it by that name and is the name of a ward within Nuneaton with a very worthy and respectable-looking councillor. I would advocate removing all the OR content and reducing it to a stub including the geographical information, pending anyone finding anything useful that can be said about it based on sources, but since our North American colleagues would find it to be more than an uninhabited railway siding in Ohio, the article itself is a keep. Elemimele (talk) 15:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep it’s a ward so probably passes WP:GEOLAND as well as being an OS settlement.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 18:26, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: despite there being a lot of WP:OR and a lack of references in the article the subject passes WP:GEOLAND as it is a populated settlement. We can always remove any unsourced information that is unverifiable. We can also add some of the sources mentioned by Elemimele. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 18:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: I rm the unsourced material per V. There are enough database records (not sourced from Wikipedia) to show this exists, but the question is if this legally recognized place? If it is legally recognized, it passes GEOLAND; if not it needs to pass GNG and it fails this. I do not see sources showing this is a legally recognized place, unless sources appear showing it is, I !v Delete. Sources found, !v Keep.  // Timothy :: talk  03:55, 19 April 2023 (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.