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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:23, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shalwan Pora (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 references or sources of any kind. Reads like a poorly written tourist webpage. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:27, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I have cited a source confirming that this passes WP:GEOLAND. These deletion nominations with a total lack of WP:BEFORE, and with the untrue statement that the articles are written like tourist webpages, are very tiresome and border on the disruptive. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:41, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @86.17.222.157: well you are certainly welcome to your opinion but as an annonymos IP that refuses to make an account your accusations don't matter much to me. These were 4 articles that were complete duplicates of one another. The only things changed were the names of the towns and the numbers of people. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:44, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• First, I have the same concerns about the lack of BEFORE work, or understanding of all that WP:GEOLAND requires for named populated places, and I am not "an annonymos" (sic) account. Second, the notion that IP accounts somehow have less rights here is bollocks. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:31, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Shawn in Montreal: didn't say they have less rights. Also love how you made sure to point out my spelling typo to give yourself a leg up. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:36, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just as you lied when you said that this article was written like a tourist webpage you also just lied when you said that you didn't say that we unregistered editors have less rights. What else does "as an anonymous IP ... your accusations don't matter much to me" mean other than you consider me to have less rights? You have been advised on your talk page by an admin, Ritchie333, to avoid passing judgement on other people's work until you you have familiarised yourself with the basics of how things work on Wikipedia, but have obviously chosen to ignore that advice. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Legally recognised populated villages should be kept per WP:GEOLAND. Content issues can be fixed by editing the article or discussing it on article's talk page. Anup [Talk] 11:19, 8 November 2016 (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.