Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vallelunga

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 no consensus. Randykitty (talk) 18:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vallelunga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article is 13 years old but is only a single line long, with no references. Perhaps we should turn this into a disambiguation leading to 3 articles, 2 of which are already linked on the page:

• ACI Vallelunga Circuit
• De Tomaso Vallelunga
• Vallelunga Pratameno

Thoughts? – numbermaniac 07:36, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. – numbermaniac 07:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:10, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. According to this paper, there is a village there of the same name ("Martello, Stelvio and Vallelunga are three small, isolated villages of the Venosta Valley in South Tyrol"), so it is a populated place and notable per WP:GEOLAND. It is also notable as the subject of the genetic study which that paper carried out. We have an article on the Venosta Valley which is a possible merge target. This travel guide confirms that Vallelunga is a side valley, and also gives the German name (Langtaufers) – places in this region are commonly dual-named. If two European languages think a place is notable enough to have a name, then it's notable enough in English to have a Wikipedia article as well. The disambiguation page suggestion is a red herring – that has nothing to do with the subject of this discussion, a disambiguation page can be created whatever the outcome here. SpinningSpark 00:11, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, the Italian WP has a disambiguation page for Vallelunga, see here, so no problems with having one here, but agree with Spinningspark above that this is beside the point, Vallelunga meets WP:NGEO and so should be kept. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:25, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, now expanded with using sources linked above. SpinningSpark 18:09, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @Spinningspark: There's a huge problem, this was originally about the valley near Rome when it was nominated. Now it's about a valley in South Tyrol which are not geographically proximate, and the article lists both places. I'd fix it, but figured here would be a better place to start. SportingFlyer talk 00:30, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• My mistake, I've moved my additions to Vallelunga (South Tyrol) and put the article back how it was. I'm probably still at "keep", this book (in Italian) describes cycling through it, although it describes the region as a plateau (pianoro) rather than a valley. There seems to be some other stuff in Italian as well, but I don't feel confident enough to write anything from Italian sources. SpinningSpark 10:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect this un-notable geographical feature to Campagnano di Roma. Trillfendi (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2019 (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.