Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tregynrig

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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tregynrig

[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)

Per coordinates, this is not a hamlet but a farm with a few buildings (the exact coordinates come up under the name "Thomas N". Does not appear to meet notability criteria, other sources fail to confirm notability. Kazamzam (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Kazamzam (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing found except listings for a beach cottage and misleading WP-scraped content (a perfect illustration of why articles for such nonexistent locales should be deleted). Only source is Google Maps, which is a red flag as they source data from WP, among other places, leading to a possibility of circular referencing. Could just as easily be a copyright trap for all we know. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 14:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It does exist but its not an OS settlement[1] (it only shows "[other features]" rather than "[Other Settlement]") so probably doesn't pass GEOLAND and could be merged with Llanbadrig. The Welsh Wikipedia article doesn't contain anything substantial. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Cemaes which a couple of real estate sites treat it as a synonym of. It is called a "family-run farm"[2] and a "620 acre holding"[3] both of which indicate it is not a settlement covered by GEOLAND. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:03, 28 September 2023 (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.