Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cala Vadella

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. (non-admin closure) Mediran (t • c) 02:14, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cala Vadella

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

advertising. No reliable sources added. Partly WP:OR The Banner talk 13:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - Named place of verified existence, keep per longstanding consensus. Carrite (talk) 18:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Ow, is there a consensus to keep advertising and promo? The Banner talk 19:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Per WP:NGEO. This is not an article about a business that fails to assert notability, it's about a named geographical location or natural feature. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- And it is written as an advertisement... The Banner talk 20:43, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Right, but we're not here to discuss stylistic issues which can be fixed. And honestly, while I'd agree that the prose is slightly inappropriate, I don't see just what the article would be advertising. It's a geographical location. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:48, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep – This is an article about named geographical location or natural feature. It is both Has both sources, and indication of significance. keep per longstanding consensus. Dennisbluie (talk) 08:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appears to be a legitimate geographical place, geological feature, and possibly a populated place. Under all our guidelines and essays regarding these subjects, I see no grounds for deletion. The fact that it's written like an advertisement does not mean wholesale deletion. It's an editorial content problem that is a surmountable problem. Mkdw ^talk 05:16, 2 April 2013 (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.