Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katoria

: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. (non-admin closure) czar · · 18:43, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

=[[Katoria]]=

:{{la|Katoria}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Katoria Stats])

:({{Find sources|Katoria}})

Contested PROD. Non-notable community development block in India. Poorly written, poorly sourced. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

:Delete - the references (such as they are) do not evidence the subject's notability. Pinkbeast (talk) 20:44, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment our article community development block in India says that CDB's are 3rd level administrative subdivisions in some states (equal to Tehsils). Is the nominator assuring us that CDB isn't such? For if it is; it's an automatic keep as an administrative structure of a nation state. What is the nominator's response? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 17:30, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment the article is not meaningfully about any administrative structure, but about a place which may happen to correspond to one. Or may not, given that only one of the sources does more than mention the place! Pinkbeast (talk) 18:35, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Explosions can be our friends, even for notable topics (if this one is such a topic). This isn't prose, there's not much (if anything) salvageable. Charmlet (talk) 18:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep well then, explosion happened without a deletion. Charmlet (talk) 19:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete, nothing salvageable: even if the topic were notable, a meaningful article would have to be rewritten from scratch. Most of the sources provide only trivial coverage, and only the unreliable one has any connection to the article's content. Huon (talk) 18:44, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep stub by TheOriginalSoni. Huon (talk) 21:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep - Article rewritten. A relatively simple WP:TNT compared to the other such articles from the subcontinent. It does happen to be a 3rd level administrative subdivision in Bihar, and so will make for a direct keep now. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Keep: For various reasons cited for "keep" above. It is a real place and its population should be at least 1000, even more, I presume, based on the population of similar places being administrative headquarters of a number of villages, etc. --Bhadani (talk) 14:31, 29 June 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.