Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crime in Paraguay
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Crime in Paraguay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unencyclopedic article derived from a single source. Information is otherwise unverifiable. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Kugao (talk) 23:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paraguay-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to Paraguay until enough information on the subject warrants a stand-alone article. Location (talk) 00:54, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think that's what you meant to say... Mandsford 03:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! Location (talk) 03:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep one source is a reason for improvement, not deletion. Should not be merged to main country article - no FAs on countries have sections on crime in them. I'm not sure what you mean by "otherwise unverifiable"--it is perfectly verifiable against the source cited (whose reliability you have not challenged). Perfectly encyclopedic topic - see Crime in the United States for an example of a better article about crime. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Calliopejen1 says it all, one source is reason for improvement and not deletion.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:39, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep There are similar article on wiki Someone65 (talk) 13:28, 26 January 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.