372:
as individual settlements are treated as notable. It is now identifiable in Google maps following
Danaman5's research and is revealed as a fairly substantial rural village. The lack of other information is not, therefore, sufficient reason for deletion. I propose that the title of the article should
390:. As explained above, individual settlements are almost always considered notable if they have been shown to exist. As we are slowly but surely adding sources to the article which show that the settlement does exist, the prerequisites for
156:
257:
It's true that there wasn't much there; I had to guess at what the
Chinese characters might be. The list you linked doesn't seem to break down 东莞镇, which is where this village is located, but it is listed on
229:
Hopefully I don't seem rash, but really, before, there was absolutely no helpful information, which you provided. Thanks much for the initial help, though I could not find the village on
150:
284:, but I don't know how reliable it is. I can't find any population statistics, because none of the reports are detailed enough to give statistics for a single village.--
117:
215:- This village was actually not difficult to find through Google searching. I have updated the article with more precise location information and coordinates.--
318:
280:
Since the village has now been basically identified, there is the question of finding any actionable information on it. The closest I have found is
187:
No sourcing given to indicate that this settlement exists. Not even
Chinese, coordinates, or a smaller division within Shandong province given
90:
85:
94:
77:
17:
171:
138:
246:
200:
469:
132:
36:
468:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
454:
429:
407:
382:
361:
333:
307:
293:
271:
252:
224:
206:
128:
59:
425:
403:
357:
178:
378:
81:
281:
164:
450:
303:
289:
267:
220:
329:
298:
Added a sentence about an archaeological find near the village. That's about all I can find.--
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
144:
421:
417:
399:
373:
be changed to a single word which seems to be accordance with accepted naming convention. --
353:
344:
441:- there seems to be enough here to prove the existence of this settlement, at least. Also,
374:
237:
191:
73:
65:
55:
446:
299:
285:
263:
216:
325:
259:
111:
395:
391:
230:
347:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
50:
462:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
107:
103:
99:
163:
352:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
472:). No further edits should be made to this page.
177:
8:
317:Note: This debate has been included in the
319:list of China-related deletion discussions
316:
445:the rename suggested by AJHingston.--
7:
233:of admin divisions of Ju County. –
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
489:
334:16:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
308:15:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
294:14:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
272:14:26, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
253:14:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
225:13:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
207:06:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
465:Please do not modify it.
416:Precedent also shown at
32:Please do not modify it.
455:15:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
430:13:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
408:13:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
383:09:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
362:00:06, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
60:03:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
262:(#371122110231).--
44:The result was
364:
336:
322:
236:
190:
480:
467:
351:
349:
323:
249:
244:
240:
234:
203:
198:
194:
188:
182:
181:
167:
115:
97:
34:
488:
487:
483:
482:
481:
479:
478:
477:
476:
470:deletion review
463:
398:are satisfied.
342:
247:
242:
238:
201:
196:
192:
124:
88:
74:Zhuang jia shan
72:
69:
66:Zhuang jia shan
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
486:
484:
475:
474:
458:
457:
435:
434:
433:
432:
411:
410:
385:
366:
365:
350:
339:
338:
337:
313:
312:
311:
310:
278:
277:
276:
275:
274:
185:
184:
121:
68:
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
485:
473:
471:
466:
460:
459:
456:
452:
448:
444:
440:
437:
436:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
414:
413:
412:
409:
405:
401:
397:
396:verifiability
393:
389:
386:
384:
380:
376:
371:
368:
367:
363:
359:
355:
348:
346:
341:
340:
335:
331:
327:
320:
315:
314:
309:
305:
301:
297:
296:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
273:
269:
265:
261:
260:the 2009 list
256:
255:
254:
251:
250:
241:
232:
228:
227:
226:
222:
218:
214:
211:
210:
209:
208:
205:
204:
195:
180:
176:
173:
170:
166:
162:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
130:
127:
126:Find sources:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
464:
461:
442:
438:
387:
369:
343:
282:this website
245:
212:
199:
186:
174:
168:
160:
153:
147:
141:
135:
125:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
422:Crisco 1492
400:Crisco 1492
354:Ron Ritzman
151:free images
392:notability
375:AJHingston
239:Roundtable
193:Roundtable
418:WP:NPLACE
326:• Gene93k
231:this list
447:Danaman5
345:Relisted
300:Danaman5
286:Danaman5
264:Danaman5
217:Danaman5
118:View log
443:support
213:Comment
157:WP refs
145:scholar
91:protect
86:history
248:Record
202:Record
129:Google
95:delete
235:HXL's
189:HXL's
172:JSTOR
133:books
112:views
104:watch
100:links
48:. --
16:<
451:talk
439:Keep
426:talk
404:talk
394:and
388:Keep
379:talk
370:Keep
358:talk
330:talk
304:talk
290:talk
268:talk
221:talk
165:FENS
139:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
56:talk
51:Cirt
46:keep
324:--
243:and
197:and
179:TWL
116:– (
453:)
428:)
420:.
406:)
381:)
360:)
332:)
321:.
306:)
292:)
270:)
223:)
159:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
58:)
449:(
424:(
402:(
377:(
356:(
328:(
302:(
288:(
266:(
219:(
183:)
175:·
169:·
161:·
154:·
148:·
142:·
136:·
131:(
123:(
120:)
114:)
76:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.