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. WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sengipatti (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No indication of notability. – Matthew - (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:17, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:GEOLAND, populated, legally recognized places are typically considered notable. I have cleaned up the article and added a source. GSS (talk|c|em) 08:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:GEOLAND. The place is also in the news as the proposed site for an All India Institute of Medical Sciences. Jupitus Smart 14:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep per WP:GEOLAND. Can we close this and stop wasting everybody's time? Smartyllama (talk) 15:32, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - It's a village with over 4,000 people is an indication of notability. --Oakshade (talk) 03:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Sufficient evidence of notability. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:11, 3 June 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.