Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chak Jhumra

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chak Jhumra[edit]

The article is 2 sentences concerning who is likely to win in a non-notable election a year ago. No encyclopedic value discernible. Storkk 13:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - breathtakingly pointless. BTLizard 13:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - pointless Bugtrio | Talk 13:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a geo-stub that deserves to stay. I've replaced the pointless sentences. --Mereda 14:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If User:Mereda wants to flesh the article out a bit more, I wouldnt mind a keep. I know nothing about the place, just nominated because the article was total hogwash. It's not quite a stub yet, but still - it might have some potential. --Storkk 14:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have another look. Quite apart from WilyD's fairminded point, there's been an internationally notable event in the town. --Mereda 16:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the common law. Every Cherry Valley, Arkansas has an article if its in the States, no matter how nothing a town it is. Same applies here. WilyD 16:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Yes, I entirely agree with you now that it has a real page (i.e. now that Mereda has made a stub). To see why I nominated it, please look at the pages history. --Storkk 01:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WilyD, article is being improved. RFerreira 18:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the rewrite Dlyons493 Talk 20:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Kappa 20:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as rewritten. The best outcome of an AFD discussion is an improved article. GRBerry 03:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if rewritten with some more details about the place. But if more importance is given to the famous "Blasphemy Event" then its better to have a seperate page for that event. Marwatt 12:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Definitely looks like significant enough city for article. Keep expanding. LotLE×talk 01:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep and please keep expanding geo stubs are important here Yuckfoo 17:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above. --Myles Long 21:49, 9 September 2006 (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.