Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guda Endla

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. But clearly there is room for improvement with this article. Editors are encourage to spend some time on it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:25, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guda Endla

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I couldn't find sources to verify this. Boleyn (talk) 19:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Rajasthan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is plenty of evidence that this is a recognised settlement and therefore passes WP:GEOLAND. The police stations reports, for instance. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tentative keep. I found three Google news articles about recent crimes in the village. I edited the lead. Could someone else please add the articles to this article? If not, please userfy. Bearian (talk) 02:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 09:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: meets WP:NPLACE. There is coverage confirming its existence (e.g. [1][2]) C F A 💬 17:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Looking up Guda Endla shows it’s an existing and recognized region. Meets WP:GEOLAND. Priscilladfb16 (talk) 06:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment What I'm seeing here are passing references to a place which one presumes is a village. I'm not seeing sources provided which are about the place, so for instance we are still missing such basic data as where it is and its population. There are still no sources for the article's claims. I'm not going push for deletion, but I really don't think what we have here is adequate. Mangoe (talk) 15:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- But the topic is clearly notable per WP:GEOLAND. The article may be substandard, but there's certainly enough evidence it exists for a stub. Any unsourced material can be removed. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:14, 3 September 2024 (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.