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. Users felt the articles were notable under WP:GEOLAND. (non-admin closure) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 07:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mochiwala[edit]

[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)

Not notable, unsourced, original research, oh my!

Articles detail some of the many chaks (villages) in Pakistan. These are typically unsourced, or just contain mapping information as sources. Some seem to be written by residents of the chaks in question. These articles are typically short. There are very, very likely similar short, unsourced, non-notable, completely unnecessary articles for chaks exactly like these across Wikipedia, but these are just the ones I could find. Ah, the pain and suffering of unpaid quality control.

Here are the aforementioned "articles". I had difficulties placing the AfD notices on the articles, but they're linked here:

AdoTang (talk) 03:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 April 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: (copying from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chak 217 GB (2nd nomination)) WP:GEOLAND states that populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable. Would it not be possible to simply remove the unsourced material? if the communities can be verified and some sources can be dug up then they could probably just be pared down to stubs. Mbdfar (talk) 17:55, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 138,722 people in 21,935 households (2017 Census Jhang district, Punjab, p.54). --Goldsztajn (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Added a newspaper and a government census website reference today. Removed some unsourced content. Passes WP:GEOLAND now. Ngrewal1 (talk) 17:22, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all — in addition to the census document Goldsztajn posted, I found the other four nominated villages in similar documents. Chak 151 P is here at the bottom of page 116; Chak 356 is here at the top of page 1; Haji Chak is here on page 55 (the name is given as "Chak Haji" here); and finally Chak 71 NB is on page 73 here. I'm not entirely sure how to interpret the census data here (for example, Mochiwala seems to only be listed as an administrative unit and not an individual settlement), and some of the articles might need renaming or disambiguating, but at the very least they all pass GEOLAND. 3 kids in a trenchcoat (talk) 05:10, 17 April 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.