Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2012/Sikh Villages In Gujranwala

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to Delete. Chenzw Talk 06:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh Villages In Gujranwala

Sikh Villages In Gujranwala (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Osiris has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Persuant to Wikipedia:Not an indiscriminate list -- There doesn't seem to be a criteria for this list (it's not clear what a "very large number" means). Completely unsourced. And equally important: do we really need a list of villages by religion?

Osiris (talk) 03:17, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

Discussion

Delete. This list isn't useful at all. Also, the article doesn't state why it's notable. --weltforce (talk) 10:22, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~Geographical places are usually considered inherently notable, although I see that this is being debated at en:Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(geography). --Auntof6 (talk) 15:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)~~[reply]
- Merge as stated below. --weltforce (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Gujranwala District. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I am not sure a list based on religion, which is not and probably cannot be verified, is at all useful. To me it looks like a subtle POV article.--Peterdownunder (talk) 01:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per nom and others. It's unsourced, unwikified, not notable and POV. If we let in one list of this type we'll be deluged with others. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:33, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As it is, this article is like a Gordian knot. --Horeki (talk) 17:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As Écrivain explains below, this article is not useful in any way. This is an unsourced list. What else matters? If there is a good reason why this RfD is open for such a long time, it is not obvious to me. --Horeki (talk) 22:41, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Its not useful in any way in a wiki. Unreferenced. Its sad though, looks like someone's hard work gone down. Écrivain (talk) 19:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Écrivain's help was invited here. Our project is enhanced by contributions from those who are willing to try to help us with India-related articles. --Horeki (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It is unsourced (though this could theoretically be fixed.) In it's current form and in the context of the current evolution of articles about places (in India and in general), it is not particularly useful - and would stick out somewhat. Lessons that we can pick from this are to inform new editors more about notability and sourcing; it's sad that someone's efforts will be wasted - coz she/he have put in a ton of work on this. On the point about religion based lists, this could conceivably be regarded as a community based list since the specific community being referred to is as much a religious one as it is a cultural and social one - but that's not adequately convincing me to change my "Delete" suggestion. (Please note that I am responding because I was specifically requested to by an existing Simple community member. I have only just started editing on Simple. Also, this comment is my personal comment, and not an official one - as I lead up the India Program team at WMF.)Hisham (talk) 01:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hisham's help was invited here. --Horeki (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Gujranwala District - I agree with Auntof6. Also I do get the point Hisham is making, its not useful in its current form but that can be fixed while merging it with Gujranwala District. --Deepon (talk) 01:50, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deepon's help was invited here. --Horeki (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Agree with Deepon AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 08:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AbhiSuryawanshi's help was invited here. --Horeki (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Gujranwala District. Any additional names in Sikh Villages In Gujranwala should be added to the list maintained at Gujranwala District. However, if we want to divide the list of villages based on religion, then we should have two lists; one for Sikh villages and the other for Muslim villages; to make it NPOV. Nitika.t (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nitika.t's help was invited here. --Horeki (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Primarily for me, the most important thing on any wikipedia is Notability, unfortunately, I see no references here, doesn't matter if this article is valid or useful, as a user, if I can't trust it, it should be in an encyclopaedia. Merge is also not a bad option, but I would like to see at least one credible source citing at least some of this data. --Debastein (talk) 20:07, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On further examination from a goggle search, the info may be cross checked from this link however, it appears to be vast and too tedious. --Debastein (talk) 20:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Gujranwala District, would be a good option--Chip123456 (talk) 17:34, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Very difficult to class a village as 'Sikh' or not. Per Peterdownunder really, he expresses it better than I do. Kennedy ^(talk) 12:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 03:17, 20 June 2012 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.