- 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Springfield Park (Durban) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG, with the second source being a Google Maps link, and the other three being business websites. A previous draftification attempt was contested. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 05:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Seems to be a fairly uncontroversial case of a populated place, which meets the guidelines per WP:GEOLAND. "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low." Sourcing is of course poor and needs improving, although in the description of the sources, the nominator neglected to mention the first source, which is the census data. Greenman (talk) 11:43, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, I didn't know that populated places are considered notable. I will withdraw the nomination soon. FYI the reason I neglected to mention the first source (reliable census data) is because WP:GNG requires two reliable sources rather than just one. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep- For the same reason Greenman has stated. GeographicAccountant (talk) 17:26, 22 December 2022 (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.