820:
all be expanded even despite the lack of sources on the web.... This nomination is a waste of time. The time I've spent arguing the case that these places are adequate settlements I could have tried to expand those which do have at least some sources available. Knowledge would be better off trying to have these articles expanded rather than deleted. Verifiable, inhabited places are generally within our guidlines are they not? I genuinely hope these places develop in terms of web content... As it stands they can be expanded, look at
795:. Viewing the satellite map of the settlement we see hundreds of houses. It is possible that is might be as notable, more notable than Angus Cobblestone Farmhouse and Barn Complex, a mere barn? I think I've made my point, perhaps others will see what I mean. I agree with that a good encyclopedia needs solid sources and quality content but this is not always possible to have an even number of sources on the Internet. Lets try another at randomlets try
752:
many of these settlements you;ve nominated, being in
Kazakhstan's most populated province have significant numbers of people living in them. Why is a stub on a small town with several thousand in Kazakhstan any less notable than a tiny village in the UK or US? DO you genuinely think that because the tiny village in the UK has a lot of sources written about it that it is more notable than
648:. I agree that these stubs need expanding and need blessing with sources, but Kazakhstan is not exactly number 1 on the web for information... If we were to strictly go by sources we would have few articles about places in Africa, Asia and Latin America.... Understand that in countries such as Kazakhstan lack of sources is not always an indicator of lack of notability. Trust me on this.
887:- there are two practical problems with keeping these articles. The first is that it slows down the assessment process, because each one has to be individually assessed for the project. The second is that there is currently very little possibility of expansion. I am ignoring all rules in suggesting these pages for deletion, but I feel there is seriously another side to the argument.
870:
changed, that's the way it is. Since this appears to be a nomination out of principle, rather than an assertion that each article has been individually examined and found not to meet the guideline, I'll say keep all. I'm perfectly willing to entertain a motion to delete any individual entry that isn't a hick town.
869:
has 1.6 million people, and close to 800 villages. While we do have to be on guard on the policy being abused (such as someone trying to sell their neighborhood as its own village), I think it's a good policy, after having initially disliked it. I'll give the Joe Friday answer, until the rules are
819:
says something about the streets and development in
Akbulak. Seemingly notable but what do you know, little online about them... Did you even bother to check every single one for sources in Russian and Kazakh that you blindly nominated before trying to put them into the bin? It would seem they could
803:. Its a western suburb of Almaty, and has amajor Russian Orthodox Church in it. Such a church would generally be notable enough in any English town to have its own article, let alone an article on the suburb. But because there is little online about it they should be dismissed? OK lets google search
907:
articles are even shorter perhaps, it wasn't me who created them either. I think you'll find there is a wide consensus that populated places are regarded as notable. You certainly have apoint though that they need expanding into something worthwhile and that very few of them in their present state
751:
There is little evidence online to indicate much about the notability of
Taldykorgan. But I ask the average wikipedian here. Would they consider a city with 118,000 people notable? Would they consider small towns with several thousand worthy of encyclopedic coverage. Because you can be certain that
673:
and it applies to all articles. It doesn't matter whether the information is verifiable, it matters whether these settlements are notable. Unless someone can provide sources indicating notability, every single one of these minor settlement stubs should be deleted. And from my point of view, that
764:
Taldykorgan is ten times as anotable a settlement but the sources reflect the opposite. You are failing to take into account one crucial factor in determining notability in the developing world, that access to sources is generally a very poor judge of the scale and notability of the subject.
786:
as an example, a settlement with hundreds upion hundreds of houses and 23 964 in 2009 according to
Russian wikipedia (equally unsourced and sparse an article). This is a substantial town in Almaty Province yet our friend google strongly says this is not notable. Now lets try
760:. Village in England I wrote a few weeks back and promoted to GA. Judging by content and web sources this village is obviously more notable than Taldykorgan which has nothing but databases and computer generated sites on the Internet. I strongly disagree, I
733:
or any of the other minor settlements in the template. From my point of view, notability is conferred by significant coverage in reliable sources, not simply a suspicion that it is inherently notable due to the amount of inhabitants.
530:(Pop 23,000) too and the rest of the district capitals. Hell these are major towns and the rest appear to be adequately sized small towns/villages according to google map satellite views of them, all are notable in my view....
930:
Places do not need to have extensive coverage, only their existence must be verifiable. "ention of a town in a census" is sufficient for this. Technical concerns (WP-assessment) should not be a reason to delete content.
165:
643:
By your criteria we should delete thousands of articles about towns in the developing world just because our friend google doesn't have anything on them except a map. These places are verifiable. Look at Abay
580:
And you've honestly looked for sources in
Russian and Kazakh have you? I'll ask my good friend Ezhiki tomorrow. I'd bet there is mention of several of the settlements you are proposing in Soviet censuses and
701:. Nothing but computer generated sites and useless databases/blogs, none of these sources indicate notablility. Do we delete that article too based on your criteria? Is it likely that actually these places
513:
All places are inhabited settlements with several hundred people living in them, especially around Almaty, the largest city in
Kazakhstan and most populated area. These should be expanded, not deleted.
555:
to suggest that we should keep the articles simply because there will be articles on them in the future. The current articles provide the reader with no more information than a table on
625:- I did not realise that the district capitals were included in the "settlement" listing, because I based it on the template. I've edited the nomination to reflect that.
998:
159:
808:
697:
for instance in Almaty
Province has a population of 118,000 and I couldn't find much at all to expand it into a full article. No solid sources in english on the web,
705:
notable and are certainly notable to the people who live in them everyday but actually we are hampered by uneven coverage on the
Internet in terms of information?
120:
982:
788:
698:
791:. Oh and suddenly it is covered in reliable sources, so obviously this farmhouse and barn in New York state is more notable than Ushtobe. OK lets go with
125:
904:
800:
645:
200:. I propose that information about this village and all other small settlements nominated should be placed in a table in the article
862:
815:
says something about the "microdistrict" in southwest of Almaty as being areas of business/residential growth from the 1960, and
93:
88:
97:
17:
652:
for instance in Almaty
Province has a population of 118,000 and I couldn't find much at all to expand it into a full article.
180:
147:
80:
908:
are up to a decent standard. Unfortunately we suffer from a wide number of sources and editors working on such countries.
812:
424:
419:
332:
327:
57:
976:
428:
336:
240:
235:
601:
A mention of a town in a census would not be "significant coverage". I've searched some of the village names through
950:
And of course when expanding articles on villages it leads to connection to other articles and further growth like
470:
465:
378:
373:
286:
281:
244:
1052:
474:
411:
382:
319:
290:
36:
141:
1051:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
227:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
816:
522:. Gradually sources in Russian.Kazakh will become available. This person is proposing to delete articles like
1024:- consensus clearly shows that populated places are considered inherently notable, whether or not they meet
457:
365:
273:
49:
137:
559:
could. Furthermore, if there are no non-trivial mentions in sources, these articles seriously don't meet
1037:
1013:
988:
966:
944:
920:
896:
879:
854:
836:
811:. Some mention of it on Kazakhstan based sites but little on it despite it being a section of the city.
777:
743:
717:
683:
664:
634:
613:
593:
572:
542:
213:
62:
693:
Lack of content is generally confused by article deletionists such as yourself as lacking NOTABILITY.
187:
1025:
670:
560:
197:
951:
875:
821:
796:
173:
1033:
940:
892:
850:
739:
679:
630:
609:
568:
209:
218:
I am also nominating the following related pages because they are similar in terms of content:
1009:
552:
551:
The problem is that expansion is impossible as there aren't any sources available. It's a bit
84:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
955:
909:
825:
766:
706:
653:
582:
531:
153:
866:
556:
500:
201:
871:
1029:
936:
888:
846:
735:
675:
626:
605:
564:
415:
323:
205:
1005:
792:
730:
515:
231:
76:
68:
491:
445:
399:
353:
307:
261:
114:
753:
726:
694:
649:
523:
461:
369:
277:
954:
which I started this morning....I'm pretty certain they are all encyclopedic...
757:
519:
933:
It doesn't take long, btw. I'll just start to post the WikiProject banners.
604:
and didn't find any significant coverage in reliable third-party sources.
407:
315:
975:
per precedent. Populated places are regarded as notable, generally. --
783:
527:
223:
865:
pretty well spells it out-- a confirmed populated place is kept. The
453:
361:
269:
518:
for instance is no diferent in size to a village in england like
1045:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
674:
would be good for
Knowledge. We need quality, not quantity.
729:
for notability to be demonstrated. The same is not true of
602:
487:
483:
479:
441:
437:
433:
395:
391:
387:
349:
345:
341:
303:
299:
295:
257:
253:
249:
110:
106:
102:
172:
905:Category:Cities, towns and villages in Kyrgyzstan
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1055:). No further edits should be made to this page.
999:list of Kazakhstan-related deletion discussions
186:
8:
789:Angus Cobblestone Farmhouse and Barn Complex
499:and all other stub articles on villages in
993:
903:Well good luck in trying to delete them.
997:: This debate has been included in the
845:it's an actual location that exists.
7:
725:There are enough sources concerning
24:
863:Knowledge:Notability (geography)
782:OK heres an example.. Lets use
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
196:Village which does not meet
501:Almaty Province#Settlements
1072:
801:Lets view on a google map
1048:Please do not modify it.
1038:16:34, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
1014:15:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
989:13:45, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
967:12:44, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
945:10:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
921:09:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
897:07:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
880:02:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
63:01:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
855:23:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
837:21:29, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
778:21:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
744:21:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
718:21:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
684:21:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
669:The criteria is called
665:21:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
635:20:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
614:20:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
594:20:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
573:20:49, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
543:20:41, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
214:20:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
48:. Nomination withdrawn
978:Ser Amantio di Nicolao
805:Akbulak Micro District
1022:Nomination withdrawn
952:Kapchagay Reservoir
822:Akbulak, Kazakhstan
797:Akbulak, Kazakhstan
526:(Pop. 118,000) and
984:Lo dicono a Signa.
44:The result was
1016:
1002:
934:
1063:
1050:
1003:
979:
964:
963:
932:
918:
917:
834:
833:
807:its other name,
775:
774:
715:
714:
662:
661:
591:
590:
540:
539:
495:
477:
449:
431:
403:
385:
357:
339:
311:
293:
265:
247:
191:
190:
176:
128:
118:
100:
60:
56:
52:
34:
1071:
1070:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1053:deletion review
1046:
987:
977:
957:
956:
911:
910:
867:Almaty Province
827:
826:
768:
767:
708:
707:
655:
654:
584:
583:
557:Almaty Province
533:
532:
468:
452:
422:
406:
376:
360:
330:
314:
284:
268:
238:
222:
202:Almaty Province
133:
124:
91:
75:
72:
58:
54:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1069:
1067:
1058:
1057:
1041:
1040:
1018:
1017:
991:
981:
948:
947:
924:
923:
900:
899:
882:
857:
749:
748:
747:
746:
691:
690:
689:
688:
687:
686:
638:
637:
619:
618:
617:
616:
578:
577:
576:
575:
546:
545:
506:
497:
496:
450:
404:
358:
312:
266:
194:
193:
130:
126:AfD statistics
71:
66:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1068:
1056:
1054:
1049:
1043:
1042:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1026:WP:NOTABILITY
1023:
1020:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1000:
996:
992:
990:
986:
985:
980:
974:
971:
970:
969:
968:
965:
962:
961:
953:
946:
942:
938:
929:
926:
925:
922:
919:
916:
915:
906:
902:
901:
898:
894:
890:
886:
883:
881:
877:
873:
868:
864:
861:
858:
856:
852:
848:
844:
841:
840:
839:
838:
835:
832:
831:
823:
818:
814:
810:
806:
802:
798:
794:
790:
785:
780:
779:
776:
773:
772:
763:
759:
755:
745:
741:
737:
732:
728:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
716:
713:
712:
704:
700:
696:
685:
681:
677:
672:
671:WP:NOTABILITY
668:
667:
666:
663:
660:
659:
651:
647:
642:
641:
640:
639:
636:
632:
628:
624:
621:
620:
615:
611:
607:
603:
600:
599:
598:
597:
596:
595:
592:
589:
588:
574:
570:
566:
562:
561:WP:NOTABILITY
558:
554:
550:
549:
548:
547:
544:
541:
538:
537:
529:
525:
521:
517:
512:
509:
508:
507:
504:
502:
493:
489:
485:
481:
476:
472:
467:
463:
459:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
430:
426:
421:
417:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
384:
380:
375:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
351:
347:
343:
338:
334:
329:
325:
321:
317:
313:
309:
305:
301:
297:
292:
288:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
246:
242:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
220:
219:
216:
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
198:WP:NOTABILITY
189:
185:
182:
179:
175:
171:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
139:
136:
135:Find sources:
131:
127:
122:
116:
112:
108:
104:
99:
95:
90:
86:
82:
78:
74:
73:
70:
67:
65:
64:
61:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1047:
1044:
1021:
994:
983:
972:
959:
958:
949:
927:
913:
912:
884:
859:
842:
829:
828:
804:
793:Abay, Almaty
781:
770:
769:
761:
750:
731:Abay, Almaty
710:
709:
702:
692:
657:
656:
622:
586:
585:
579:
535:
534:
516:Abay, Almaty
510:
505:
498:
217:
195:
183:
177:
169:
162:
156:
150:
144:
134:
77:Abay, Almaty
69:Abay, Almaty
45:
43:
31:
28:
960:Dr. Blofeld
914:Dr. Blofeld
830:Dr. Blofeld
771:Dr. Blofeld
754:Taldykorgan
727:Taldykorgan
711:Dr. Blofeld
695:Taldykorgan
658:Dr. Blofeld
650:Taldykorgan
587:Dr. Blofeld
536:Dr. Blofeld
524:Taldykorgan
511:Speedy keep
160:free images
46:speedy keep
553:WP:CRYSTAL
1006:• Gene93k
872:Mandsford
813:This site
758:Ambrosden
520:Ambrosden
1030:Claritas
973:Keep all
937:Pgallert
928:Keep all
889:Claritas
860:Keep all
847:Str8cash
809:see here
736:Claritas
699:see this
676:Claritas
646:on a map
627:Claritas
606:Claritas
565:Claritas
408:Aksengir
316:Akkaynar
206:Claritas
121:View log
885:Comment
784:Ushtobe
623:Comment
581:papers.
528:Ushtobe
471:protect
466:history
425:protect
420:history
379:protect
374:history
333:protect
328:history
287:protect
282:history
241:protect
236:history
224:Akbulak
166:WP refs
154:scholar
94:protect
89:history
59:Windows
756:. See
475:delete
454:Akshiy
429:delete
383:delete
362:Akozek
337:delete
291:delete
270:Akdala
245:delete
138:Google
98:delete
51:Fences
824:....
492:views
484:watch
480:links
446:views
438:watch
434:links
400:views
392:watch
388:links
354:views
346:watch
342:links
308:views
300:watch
296:links
262:views
254:watch
250:links
181:JSTOR
142:books
115:views
107:watch
103:links
55:&
16:<
1034:talk
1010:talk
995:Note
941:talk
893:talk
876:talk
851:talk
843:Keep
817:this
762:know
740:talk
680:talk
631:talk
610:talk
569:talk
488:logs
462:talk
458:edit
442:logs
416:talk
412:edit
396:logs
370:talk
366:edit
350:logs
324:talk
320:edit
304:logs
278:talk
274:edit
258:logs
232:talk
228:edit
210:talk
174:FENS
148:news
111:logs
85:talk
81:edit
1004:--
703:are
188:TWL
123:•
119:– (
1036:)
1028:.
1012:)
1001:.
943:)
935:--
895:)
878:)
853:)
799:.
742:)
682:)
633:)
612:)
571:)
563:.
503:.
490:|
486:|
482:|
478:|
473:|
469:|
464:|
460:|
444:|
440:|
436:|
432:|
427:|
423:|
418:|
414:|
398:|
394:|
390:|
386:|
381:|
377:|
372:|
368:|
352:|
348:|
344:|
340:|
335:|
331:|
326:|
322:|
306:|
302:|
298:|
294:|
289:|
285:|
280:|
276:|
260:|
256:|
252:|
248:|
243:|
239:|
234:|
230:|
212:)
204:.
168:)
113:|
109:|
105:|
101:|
96:|
92:|
87:|
83:|
1032:(
1008:(
939:(
891:(
874:(
849:(
738:(
678:(
629:(
608:(
567:(
494:)
456:(
448:)
410:(
402:)
364:(
356:)
318:(
310:)
272:(
264:)
226:(
208:(
192:)
184:·
178:·
170:·
163:·
157:·
151:·
145:·
140:(
132:(
129:)
117:)
79:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.