Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gandabahali

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 speedy keep per the precedent of WP:GEOLAND, and arguments below, a verifiable census town with reliable source. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:40, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gandabahali

[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)

Unreferenced article reads, and has numerous images, like a travelogue. Fails WP:GNG. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 17:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with nom, not suitable for Wikipedia. Wikitravel perhaps. Oaktree b (talk) 17:59, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Odisha. Shellwood (talk) 21:14, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and stubify This village exists according to the Indian Census site. Hence it passes WP:NGEO. That said, it should be stubified, and a majority of the images need to be removed from the article. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep and stubify Obviously meets WP:GEOLAND. This is the website of the Gram panchayat, which has data on population. Thanks!--Dwaipayan (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep decisively passes WP:GEOLAND.Elbatli (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2022 (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.