Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Makran district

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 delete. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:53, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Makran district

[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)

Contested redirect - nothing in article to show it meets WP:GNG or WP:GEOLAND. Would have restored the redirect, but that is no longer an option. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:35, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I don’t find any sources to support this so suggest redirecting to Makran. Mccapra (talk) 22:21, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Multiple references to Makran District in search in Newspaper Archive.com. Defined in this book in connection with British administration (page 68) [1] and here on Makran state being redesignated a district on its secession to Pakistan [2] Rupples (talk) 03:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG and NGEO. NGEO states clearly, "Populated places without legal recognition are considered on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the GNG. Examples may include subdivisions, business parks, housing developments, informal regions of a state, unofficial neighborhoods, etc. – any of which could be considered notable on a case-by-case basis, given non-trivial coverage by their name in multiple, independent reliable sources. If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the informal place should be included in the more general article on the legally recognized populated place or administrative subdivision that contains it."

Maybe redirecting to Makran would work, but someone can always create a redirect after delete. // Timothy :: talk 02:02, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed all the unsourced material per BURDEN. The one source in the article was a 404 page. I'm not sure anything in the article is correct, I think this was just an informal name used for an area caught up in ethnic cleansing and population transfers. Unless someone can come up with IS RS showing this meets GNG, it should be deleted. // Timothy :: talk 02:17, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Timothy. Clearly fails GNG and NGEO. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:52, 2 April 2023 (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.