Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dongbei District

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. plicit 13:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dongbei District[edit]

Dongbei District (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It seems that no reliable source could prove that there is such a district with administrative nature exist in Zhongshan, Guangdong, China. Fails WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND. DreamerBlue (talk) 12:22, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. DreamerBlue (talk) 12:22, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk contributions) 15:14, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete/redirect to Zhongshan. This article was mass-produced by a blocked user who made thousands of substub articles on geographic places on which he had no expertise, typically using passing mentions or tables with little context as sources, many of which I had deleted for not being real jurisdictions or redirected for lack of independent notability. Even if this exists (it is listed in Zhongshan#Administration) it's not clear it should be a separate article as a city subdivision. Reywas92Talk 16:51, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not a real administrative division. Zhongshan city is not split into 5 districts and then subdistricts. The infobox even has a note: * Not a formal administrative subdivision Gorden 2211 (talk) 00:24, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It is not a populated legally recognized place, so it fails WP:GEOLAND, and while the lack of legal recognition is not a reason to exclude, the fact that it also fails GNG is. BilledMammal (talk) 01:56, 15 September 2021 (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.