Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahmid

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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:00, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mahmid

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Geonet is not a reliable source for populated places (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 362#GEOnet Names Server (GNS) for discussion) and the Census of Iran has been known to count people according to locations that are not necessarily villages/towns but can be shops, pumps, bridges, farms etc. Fails WP:V. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 20:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:NPLACE @PharyngealImplosive7: Looking at it on Google Maps you can see there are a bunch of houses on Mahmid Road. So to think that that cluster of houses is called Mahmid makes sense to me. A large majority of tiny villages on this planet technically fail WP:V, because reliable sources (or at least the ones I have access to) do not cover every single tiny village on this planet. This is way way bigger than Achnabat. Polygnotus (talk) 03:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a wide gulf between "makes sense to me" and verifiability. Uncle G (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - The Statistical Center of Iran verified that it exists. Polygnotus (talk) 16:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, it hasn't. Read the nomination. Uncle G (talk) 02:56, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - two simple searches, one on Google maps and Open Map, shows this exists and is big enough to allow for sourcing. Bearian (talk) 04:55, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- What sources turn up when you search for the name in Arabic that Google Maps says: محیمد? Uncle G (talk) 12:19, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Shouldn't you use the Persian name? Anyway,the SNG for geographic features operate according to principles that differ from the GNG -- WP:SNG Polygnotus (talk) 17:16, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - So what sources turn up that satisfy those principles? You seem to be unwilling to provide a single one and instead argue that we should build an encyclopaedia because it "makes sense to me" that we should have things that by your own admission fail even basic verifiability. We've had a massive problem with mass-created places from databases that fail verifiability because the databases aren't constructed reliably, in Iran and elsewhere, and you're going to have to pull your finger out and actually show verifiability. "makes sense to me" is worthless in the face of what we know regarding the unreliability of these mass database imports by an editor that we had massive community discussions about and who is the article creator using a database here. Uncle G (talk) 02:56, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Bearian. Serial (speculates here) 19:40, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.