Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microregion

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. postdlf (talk) 15:30, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Microregion[edit]

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

Does not meet the general notability guideline. Not widely established concept beyond a few none notable academics. Mootros (talk) 23:13, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep over 9 thousand Google scholar hits, over 13 thousand G Book hits, with many hundreds of different authors in dealing with the Americas, Europe, and Asia, showing very wide usage in geography, history, biology, meteorology, public health, political science, business, agriculture.etc. About half of them are significant RS references so it can be greatly expanded. With respect to Brazil, it is a formal designation, as shown by the article Microregion (Brazil), and about half the GS hits refer to that country (leaving several thousand for the more general meaning). Possibly the articles can be combined. So on what basis does the nom. make his statement "a few non-notable academics"? This is why we have WP:BEFORE, and this nomination shows the results of ignoring that part of deletion policy. DGG ( talk ) 16:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per DGG, notable. Unhelpful AfD. --Reference Desker (talk) 16:31, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snowballish Keep Clearly notable. Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:19, 18 April 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.