Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holhuashi

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 redirect to Beach hut. No valid arguments for deletion have been presented and there appears to be no agreement on where to send this content if it's merged. That said, the article is almost entirely unsourced OR, so it can't stay as it is. I'll arbitrarily redirect the page for now based on the reasonable suggestion of one participant; if any editor disagrees on the target or method of integration, they can feel free to boldly change it. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:34, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Holhuashi[edit]

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

Unsourced. ~~Seems like a hoax.~~ (Withdrew statement after provision of sources) RoCo^(talk) 15:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: I'm also concerned about the notability of the subject in the article. RoCo^(talk) 23:02, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search that doesn't exceed the search you should have done WP:BEFORE shows that enough sources exist to confirm that this is definitely no hoax.Burning Pillar (talk) 19:53, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Burning Pillar: With all due respect, may I ask you to provide some reliable sources that I couldn't find upon searching? RoCo^(talk) 20:44, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You see these results(just look at the first 8 pages) and you really suspect that this is a WP:HOAX? This is not a hoax. That doesn't make it worthy for inclusion... but even passing mentions in many sources of sufficient reliability establish the existance(but not the notability) of the subject.Burning Pillar (talk) 21:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Burning Pillar:Could you please cite some sources here? Maybe I'll withdraw this nomination (and confirm notability could be established) if you're able to give some sources that ensure it is not a hoax. RoCo^(talk) 21:06, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is extremely unlikely that a book, a website by surfers,

a hotel, this site(in German) and this site are all contributing to a hoax.Burning Pillar (talk) 21:28, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Burning Pillar: Affirmative, not a hoax. However, I'm concerned about the notability of the subject. RoCo^(talk) 21:49, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral for the following reasons: firstly, no valid deletion rationale has been provided - see the first entry under WP:SKCRIT. Secondly however, I do not feel able to evaluate the notability of this subject as I suspect most of the sources that cover this subject in detail will not be in english. Of course, Wikipedia does not exclude sources in other languages, I'm just not able to speak them with any fluency. Exemplo347 (talk) 22:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 06:54, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maldives-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Redirect to Gazebo. Not sufficiently notable as a stand-alone article. Can be mentioned in Gazebo as a local variation in the Maldives. MB 03:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to beach hut. This is a type of beach hut in the Maldives. Some sources exist, but not finding enough to qualify a standalone article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:29, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge and redirect where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 04:39, 9 April 2017 (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.