Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List most reviewed places in ASEAN

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. Owen× ☎ 19:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List most reviewed places in ASEAN

[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)

Fails WP:LISTN, no evidence that being one of the "most reviewed places" on Google Maps in the ASEAN region is a notable grouping of characteristics, no reliable sources about this combination. Fram (talk) 18:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism, Lists, and Asia. Fram (talk) 18:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "Most reviews on Google Maps" is not the same as "most reviewed", nor is it a notable topic. Looks like Indonesians particularly enjoy using this site to review their shopping malls and attractions, but I'm not sure why anyone is supposed to care about this presentation of data. Reywas92^Talk 19:13, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – No evidence this specific criterion for this specific grouping of countries meets LISTN, especially with nearly no secondary coverage. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:25, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:LISTN no evidence that most reviewed on Google maps in ASEAN is notable and it lacks reliable sources for this combination.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:07, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the title is not plain english, the subject is not actually ASEAN (one Singapore item), but actually Indonesia, the notion of a list of review is specifically what WP:NOT and WP:ABOUT are at pains to discriminate content, the style of lists as being not what wikipedia is about, Google Maps is not in any way a reliable source, the lack of third party references is glaring, and the added clarification (after the page was moved from the first Prod, and this Afd was put up) of notions of what the components of the reasoning provides about reviews and the assumed validity (which goes back to WP:NOT) simply exhibits that there is no clear understanding of what wikipedia is about.JarrahTree 02:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Reywas92. The concept is strange. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 11:09, 26 October 2024 (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.