Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Archives of Burkina Faso

: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. - It does need expanding but that's not a reason to delete, I echo below - Lack of content is not lack of notability. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 • (talk) 17:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

=[[National Archives of Burkina Faso]]=

:{{la|National Archives of Burkina Faso}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/National_Archives_of_Burkina_Faso Stats])

:({{Find sources|National Archives of Burkina Faso}})

This article does not say anything about the national archives of Burkina Faso except that they exist. The first two references only confirm that it exists, the rest of the article is "see also". Wikipedia is not a directory. The article is also not very coherent. ubiquity (talk) 15:20, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Keep. National archives are notable government agencies. And stubs are fine as articles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:31, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is poor execution of a new article rather than non-notable; as Necrothesp says, major state institution. In fact this might be Speedy keep - no valid grounds for deletion advanced. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep - Lack of content is not lack of notability. It would be more useful to target articles about small countries with research and improvements rather than target them for deletion. --Lquilter (talk) 17:29, 9 September 2014 (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.