Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andar Char

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. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:54, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Andar Char

[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)

The article is a stub. After a quick search on Google, I found only one result with notability (and even this one is questionable):

https://www.connect4climate.org/story/life-moving-towards-confused-destination-andar-char-bangladesh

Other avenues were empty aside from google books where I could only find one-off mentions of the village on censuses. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 03:34, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 03:34, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 03:34, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think this would honestly be better for PROD but this is my first request and I want to see consensus to ensure I am making the right call. Super sorry. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 03:40, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I just started participating in AfD a few days ago myself and have set up some PROD's. If I were to guess this would have passed for it, but no harm no foul this works too. One of my PROD's was removed and the person who did came across as rather pushy and impatient, but ultimately all he did was remove it and, well, come across as pushy and impatient. If it happens, it happens and you can do an AfD. Learning Wiki is an ongoing process and bumps are bound to happen. As Mrs. Frizzle would say; take chances, make mistakes! Or as wiki would say, be bold :) Tautomers_{(T C)} 04:20, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree. I could not find meaningful sources on this either and based off google maps this seems like it's simply a tiny region and not a significant location. It meets neither WP:GNG nor Wikipedia:Notability (Geographic locations). Seems very cut and dry. Tautomers_{(T C)} 04:20, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:54, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- per WP:GEOLAND point one, "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. Even abandoned places can be notable, because notability encompasses their entire history. One exception is that census tracts are usually not considered notable." We know it exists.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 08:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: It does appear to be a legally recognized populated place, given its listing in census documents (This one, for example), although I can only view them through Google Books snippet view so I can't tell what those documents are saying about the place. Besides that, this source from 1932, also from snippet view describes it as an island serving as "[a centre] of fish-trade", and this one lists it as an island as well as further describing what a "char" is. Those aren't exactly significant coverage, but they could help flesh out the article a little. Altogether it looks like this place just barely squeaks by due to WP:GEOLAND but I'm fine keeping based on that. 3 kids in a trenchcoat (talk) 04:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appears in Bangladeshi census documents as Under Char (eg p.50), which has 466 households, 2,173 people and thus easily meets GEOLAND. Please take the following as a comment made in good faith: in general a WP:BEFORE process here would include a search of the appropriate census data, not just "quick" Google searching. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Clearly a recognised settlement. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:16, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per WP:GEOLAND. It is legally recognized, and is therefore notable. The "delete" voteseem to be unaware of the guideline. Sources likely exist in Bangladesh. Scorpions13256 (talk) 01:05, 4 July 2021 (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.