Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nõo

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 keep per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) B music ian 06:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nõo

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

Lack of detail, reference-less, no sections, it does not qualify as an article. I say Delete. Web+TV+3=WebTV3! (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - or merge into Nõo Parish. It may be a stub, but it is a place on the map which has inherent notability. It could undoubtedly be expanded with the application of diligence. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 15:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - definitely exists, therefore WP:NGEO consensus says the article should stay. Nõo Parish is sometimes described as a 'municipality', so 'parish' maybe is the wrong word. It seems to be significant larger area containing a number of distinct settlements, including Nõo, so merger might be innappropriate. Sionk (talk) 16:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - WP:NGEO: point nr 1. And Nõo Parish should have a separate article, so no merging. Flying Saucer (talk) 22:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per others, all geographic and populated places are notable.--FavorLaw (talk) 22:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The nom has only given reasons for article improvement, not deletion. Even if the article just read "Nõo sucks" I'd still vote keep (and obviously improve).--Oakshade (talk) 02:04, 22 February 2012 (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.