Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nandarkha

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. All places are kept per GELAND. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 23:37, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nandarkha

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

Long time troubled article, orphaned since April of 2009. Lack of incoming Wikilinks for so long of a time implies lack of necessity for article. Abovethestorm (talk) 02:43, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not sure if being an orphan is the issue here but regardless there are not any reliable sources. Meatsgains (talk) 03:20, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Goood point, Meatsgains. Suppose I should have been clearer on that point. Not sure why I bothered to point out the orphaned nature of the article over the other lingering issues that combined to cause me to propose this article. Abovethestorm (talk) 04:13, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Either way, if the article was not an orphan, I'd be more inclined to keeping it. Meatsgains (talk) 03:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Human settlements are considered notable by editor consensus. We generally keep them as long as they can be verified. Census of India says this village as over 3,000 people.[1] • Gene93k (talk) 09:58, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Gene93K and WP:GEOLAND.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 03:01, 26 December 2015 (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.