Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bakhra

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. Keep per restoration of non-gibberish, notability of populated places. joe decker ^{talk to me} 21:17, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bakhra[edit]

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

Article consists of gibberish. no real content RichardMills65 (talk) 02:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to an earlier and more comprehensible version of the article and then keep. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It has been reverted to something more sensible, and now describes a town. All towns are notable, and Google shows the place exists. (A reference of some sort would be nice to add.) --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:54, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It's a village. SL93 (talk) 23:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. The problem here was the article state, not the potential of it. A news search gives 45 results for the subject. Secret of success (talk) 06:04, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Secret of success.Pectore^talk 20:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:53, 26 April 2012 (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.