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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:30, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shangjing (china) (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)

Promotional article created by a WP:SPA (with a WP:COI username) about a Chinese village, I question why the draft was accepted by User:Aguyintobooks when it has 0 reference? By the way China has ~624,000 villages and 99.9% aren't notable by any means. We barely have any articles for the roughly ~41,636 Chinese towns and townships (typically administering ~10+ villages each). Timmyshin (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are at least 6 Shangjing's in Zhejiang alone, there's a Shangjing Village (上京村) in Rui'an, a Shangjing Village (上京村) in Qingtian County, a Shangjing Village (上京村) in Zhuji, a Shangjing Village (上井村) in Xianju County, a Shangjing Village (上京村) in Jindong District, Jinhua, as well as this Shangjing Village (上境村) in Wucheng District, Jinhua. Since China has 30+ provinces, it's not unreasonable to estimate that there are 100+ Shangjing's in China. Creating an article for one and not the others (and not even listing all of them on the dab page) just because a certain WP:SPA comes from that village is a case of WP:Systemicbias, but who is going to create articles for all 624,000 villages? Not to mention we would also have to move thousands of articles on Chinese towns and townships already created for disambiguation reasons. Timmyshin (talk) 04:16, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You aren't wrong but that's only in theory. In practice it's impossible to write articles for all 624,000 articles, or even half of them, therefore this WP:systemicbias will remain until the time we die (if WP still exists). Even creating dab pages for all of them requires nothing short of a Herculean effort considering how few editors work on these topics. Timmyshin (talk) 17:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually for a Chinese village, this is extremely well made, unless we have already made a viable alternative, I don't think we should use TNT, I fully support a rename. @Timmyshin:, I think a new task-force at Wikiproject China would be needed to deal with this, its a huge project, as huge as doing the USA to begin with. Α Guy into Books § (Message) -  09:04, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:50, 22 September 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.