Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ramlah, Fujairah

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. As the article (still) contains no sources and is contested, WP:V mandates its deletion. The entire content was "Ramlah is the name of a settlement in Fujairah." The coordinates given were 25°21′42″N 56°2′37″E. Sandstein 21:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ramlah, Fujairah[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unsourced. Fails WP:V and WP:GEOLAND. Pin points to location near Al Manama, local mosque is named in Arabic 'Suburb of Hanieh'. So not Ramlah. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 08:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 08:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 08:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 08:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 08:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Inaccurate, unsourced three-word "article". Softlavender (talk) 08:40, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unsourced —AE (talk • contributions) 08:52, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there appears to be a settlement where the Ramlah point exists on OpenStreetMap at 25.36174°N, 56.04538°E. The Fujairah census is completely unhelpful as it is either Fujairah city, Dibba city, or surroundings. SportingFlyer talk 03:17, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GEOLAND as it's on the official population map of Fujairah here as الرمله: [1] SportingFlyer talk 06:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SportingFlyer. Satisfies GEOLAND. James500 (talk) 13:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Would this pass new page review? It would not. It's not sourced, it's not notable. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fact it's a populated place on an official government map leads me to believe that WP:NEXIST is likely satisfied, even though I'm having a difficult time coming up with English sources. SportingFlyer talk 21:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss the map and potential other sources
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:02, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:40, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As I have argued before, this is a type of article that WP needs to stay relevant to its increasingly broad readership. Many of the none English-language sources are reliable and independent. In sum, they show this settlement's notability. Den... (talk) 22:54, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What non-English sources? Name one. This is a mad stub, unsourced and of no value. In fact, it's just plain misleading. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:25, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's a stretch to say this crossroads is Notable. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:28, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GEOLAND, which says, If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the informal place should be included in the more general article on the legally recognized populated place or administrative subdivision that contains it. That seems to fit.

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.