Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cuban underwater city

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. Article's subject is found to be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:22, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cuban underwater city

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

No credible evidence. A minor story. Bebopshabop (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oposed - it is a famous place and claim, but this article can be sanitized so that the readers actually become educated on this legend. The article is biased toward it being a city. I would shorten the article considerably and render the "city" claims to a single sentence with supporting references all together. Geology hypotheses must supersede imagination and faith. Think of this encyclopedia as an education tool. BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:37, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 February 19. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly notable. It's the concept that it might be man made that it notable, that is attracted media attention. Article should be factual of course.Borock (talk) 19:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cuba-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:55, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 06:41, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Passes WP:N. Source examples include [1], [2], [3], [4]. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:04, 27 February 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.