Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tunglam

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. I believe this could have been closed in the previous week, given the GEOLAND confirmation available from the first week. (non-admin closure) Lourdes 06:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tunglam

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

This article is about a Suburb in Visakhapatnam and lack of Reliable sources, this article should be deleted or should be merged with Visakhapatnam IM3847 (talk) 14:36, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Villages pass WP:NGEO. Smartyllama (talk) 12:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:13, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:18, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems to exist per [1], so meets wp:geoland. MB 05:21, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please check Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pathebada, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venkatraopet, Eluru and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Narasimharao Pet for articles that are Neighbourhoods of a city.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist: Delete, Keep or Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Exemplo347 (talk) 11:35, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While the article is lacking sources, there is potential of bringing more sources to this article of a notable village. Capitals00 (talk) 15:22, 2 July 2017 (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.