Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bakdash

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, notability is clearly established, no further deletion arguments standing. Non-admin closure --Pgallert (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bakdash

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable Lack of notability —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beastiepaws (talk • contribs) 01:15, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The la template, but not the section header, has been corrected to point to the article title proper. —C.Fred (talk) 05:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to read the AfD guidelines, and at the very least start an AfD properly by adding the name of the page. Bakdash is very notable, and is staple tourist destination in Syria. Yazan (talk) 01:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if I'm not going quickly enough for you, but I was attempting to fix the problem when you leapt in. Beastiepaws (talk) 01:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - Anyone knowing Syria know Bakdash. It has a historic significance, and while books mention it in the passing, they recognize it's special popularity. It does have a special historic and popular significance. -RobertMel (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article, since Bakdash is also the family name of a popular person and possibly others. If you don't agree for the move, feel free to move it back. -RobertMel (talk) 02:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep per notable and reliable references. Yazan (talk) 04:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The BBC article cited is pretty clear - that Bakdash is very, very well known. SmokingNewton (talk) 05:27, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sufficient evidence of coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:GNG. —C.Fred (talk) 05:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per Yazan and RobertMel.--Ankara (talk) 06:54, 3 March 2010 (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.