Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oru na Nneude

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, obviously. Inhabited places are notable, as described by all participants in this discussion. The topic of moving or renaming the article to follow convention or whatever is a subject for discussions elsewhere. JERRY ^talk _contribs 19:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oru na Nneude

Wholly non-notable village. Asserts no major importance. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 13:53, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Also nominating the following:

Note the author of this article is currently blocked from editing for 3 months for vandalism. Gwernol 14:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Article is terrible in every way, but the subject would appear easily large enough to be notable. It must have a population of several thousands. Nominator does not understand the relevant policies, I'm afraid - his link goes to the non-adopted "Notability (schools)"! Johnbod (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was my mistake; as a user with 11,000+ edits, I am quite keen on policies; SCL was linked to not only Places and Transportation but to Schools, which I corrected the error. A village of "several thousands" -- can this be verified or at least acknowledged outside of WP? A general search engine query proves fruitless. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 14:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The FallingRain entry has this listed under population "Approximate population for 7 km radius from this point: 63873". Note: this does not mean the village itself is that big, it may just be near a large metropolitan area but it is certainly close to something large, if not large itself. Also the article Ahiara mentions it as being one of the "ten scepters of Ahiara" so if it could be improved it would be nice to have an article on each one. I don't know if this meets the notability requirements and I'm not sure whether to keep it or not, just pointing out what I have noticed. -AndrewBuck (talk) 16:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Aren't villages and such generally accepted to be notable regardless? PC78 (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all and move to Oru na Nneunde, Nigeria. Didn't you know? Every frickin' village on the planet is considered inherently notable. I didn't make the rules. Mandsford (talk) 18:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No reason whatsoever to move this article, since there are no others with the same title. PC78 (talk) 22:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, no reason other than so that people know where it's located. Most of us aren't human gazeteers. That's the convention even on places like Los Angeles, California. Meet me at the restaurant in Oru na Nneunde and I'll buy you a beer. Mandsford (talk) 15:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
?! You read past the title of the article, that's how you know where it is. There is no such convention for these articles, see London, Paris, Tokyo, or, to be more relevant, the majority of articles in Category:Villages in Nigeria. PC78 (talk) 18:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all. The alternate spelling Oru na Lude (Oru and Lude), seems more common. Perhaps Oru na Lude is more appropriate. I've added references. Unfortunately, we're going to come across this problem more and more often: towns and villages with nothing a search engine will find. (Fortunately this isn't the case here). Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very surprised an editor with 11,000 edits thinks that villages are deletion material. They aren't, per long standing precedent. Perhaps it was the creator's vandalism? Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With no assertion of notability, outside of population, and no other verifiable sources, then the article is nothing more than a very poorly constructed stub. If someone wants to recreate it in the future, they have the tools available to do so. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Oru na Nneude, village whose existence is verified. Davewild (talk) 08:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Have we stopped considering all villages inherently notable? If not, keep. If so, please say where such a decision was made. The reasoning for this exception to Wikipedia:Notability is debatable, but, as long as its in place, there's no reason for inconsistency in coverage. The article is better off than when you nominated it, Seicer; take another look. Picaroon (t) 23:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One would say it's better off as a result of being nominated, because more people have paid a visit to Oru na Nneude just to find out what it was. For those of you who couldn't care less, it's a city in the West African nation of Nigeria. Mandsford (talk) 01:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's sad that it takes an AFD for people to care about an article. What investment has been made to the articles is only minimal though. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:27, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; deletion nominations aren't exactly supposed to be article improvement drives (deletion is for when improvement seems unlikely to work). But without more sources, what more can be done to it? It's formatted/organized about right. I find that articles related to the southeast are often in this condition; Yoruba and Hausa-Fulani subjects are generally better off than Igbo ones, but only because there are less articles to take care of, and less inexperienced users to deal with. Picaroon (t) 01:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True, and one of the primary contributors is just a ranting lunatic, and there seems to be a lack of editors in that particular region. I can't find anything regarding it, outside of what's posted, through a wide-scope database search at our university. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:48, 11 February 2008 (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.