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. – Joe (talk) 08:26, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sansy, Turkmenistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

The village does not exist, the creator has just been blocked indef for creating articles on mostly fictitious references with untelated references. Ymblanter (talk) 17:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkmenistan-related deletion discussions. Ymblanter (talk) 17:45, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:05, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nomination.TH1980 (talk) 01:04, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The sources are bogus, I can't find any mentions of it elsewhere, and searching it on Google Maps simply shows a pin in the middle of nowhere. Aerin17 (t • c) 03:41, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Aerin17: Check out the US Army May Service topographic map NJ 40-3 Modar at those coordinates and you will find Sansyya, an alternate name for Sansy. --Bejnar (talk) 23:06, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Okay, I take back the comment about it not existing-- but simply because a settlement can be found on a couple of maps/lists does not mean that it is notable enough for a Wikipedia page. It doesn't particularly meet WP:GEOLAND, given that it doesn't seem to be a populated, legally recognized place, and there is no other coverage of it to be found. What would the page even be? There's potentially something at these coordinates but we know nothing about it? Aerin17 (t • c) 00:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Aerin17: Re: "legally recognized place" see, for example, listing here in the 1976 print version U.S.S.R.: Official Standard Names Approved by the United States, which also shows it as a populated place. In Russian it is Санси, and is listed as a rural settlement. --Bejnar (talk) 00:54, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I am making a very skeptical face through my computer screen. I will freely admit that I don't have much experience with GEOLAND to know whether being in this book/database technically counts as making it a legally recognized place. If that means it meets the letter of the guideline, sure, fine. But I feel like it's a stretch. Even the guideline has some flexibility, given the use of the word "typically." Given that literally no other sources can be found beyond notes/maps/databases that show nothing more than its existence (yes, I saw the ones in your comment below), I still do not believe that Sansy is notable. Aerin17 (t • c) 01:33, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the coordinates are confirmed here, it is a settlement in the Karakum Desert. Alternate names are "Sansyya" and "Sansyz". The settlement at Kirpili (Kirpichli) is 13.5 nautical miles east of Sansy. It is shown on the US Army May Service topographic map NJ 40-3 Modar as "Sansyya" copy here. Kirpichli is shown on the same map. Sansy is listed in the GNS database, with its alternative names. Listed here in the 1976 print version U.S.S.R.: Official Standard Names Approved by the United States. --Bejnar (talk) 03:33, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Geonames is a notoriously bad source. That something is there may mean that (i) the settlement exist (ii) something exists there, but it is not a settlement, for example, a geological party location or a small military installation; (iii) it existed there but is no longer there; (iv) it is a mistake, for example, the settlement has been renamed and has other coordinates. The fact that OSM and Google Maps (including Google panoramas) shows nothing is a strong indication that we are dealing with (iii) or (iv). That the coordiates are the same is not surprising since the creator of the article obviously copied them from Geonames.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ymblanter: Those things are not true of the US Army May Service topographic map NJ 40-3 Modar which clearly shows "Sansyya" copy here. --Bejnar (talk) 23:01, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I see the name on the map, but I do not see any evidence that this is a settlement. It could be a single house for example--Ymblanter (talk) 05:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - This used to be a settlement — I doubt Sov-mil. but cannot confirm in less than a week. I do not think that the subject has any chance of meeting GNG. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Doesn't seem notable per above. Qwerfjkltalk 14:41, 18 September 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.