Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Govardhan Eco Village
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. Actual "official" settlements, villages, etc may indeed be automatically notable, there is no evidence that this is anything other a private farm run by the Krishnas, so it does not fall into that category. As this is the third time this has been deleted I will be create-protecting it as well. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Govardhan Eco Village[edit]
- Govardhan Eco Village (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nice project but it's not even mentioned in RS. Gaura79 (talk) 08:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 02:44, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete -- per nom. Wikidas© 12:14, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:12, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep , why geographical locations are not notable? (User) Mb (Talk) 22:36, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you know of any reliable sources that discuss how this subject is notable? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- While it is FP, it states that "Based on recent consensus demonstrated at numerous AfD discussions, every geographic location or entity that has a name and a verified location is suitable for inclusion as a topic of an article in Wikipedia." This is consensus that was not disputed even if not a guideline.[1] --(User) Mb (Talk) 11:12, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Where are your reliable sources? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- While it is FP, it states that "Based on recent consensus demonstrated at numerous AfD discussions, every geographic location or entity that has a name and a verified location is suitable for inclusion as a topic of an article in Wikipedia." This is consensus that was not disputed even if not a guideline.[1] --(User) Mb (Talk) 11:12, 7 February 2011 (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.