Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aşağıdolay, Bismil

Aşağıdolay, Bismil

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Aşağıdolay, Bismil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This is a proposal to Redirect Aşağıdolay, Bismil to Bismil, as has been done with all other poorly-sourced stubs in the district. I'm bringing it to AfD since my trim and redirect were reverted.

The article consists mainly of generalizations such as "It mostly shares the same cultural views with the rest of Diyarbakir province as it is just a small settlement around the city"; "The history of neighborhood is connected to the history of the city of Diyarbakir"; and "The economy of settlement mainly depends on the production of primary goods that related to agriculture; growing vegetables and fruits that suits well the climate of the region and cattle-breeding (farming)" which I was unable to verify with Yerelnet (which is a questionable source anyway) and probably wouldn't belong in the article even if they were better sourced.

When we cut the cruft, we're left with "Aşağıdolay is suburban area in Bismil district of Diyarbakır Province, Turkey" sourced to www.bismil.gov.tr. I couldn't find the mention of Aşağıdolay on that site but I assume it's there somewhere. There's no point in maintaining this as a stub; in cases like this it makes more sense to redirect to the district until someone decides to expand it into an article. –dlthewave ☎ 17:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 17:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 17:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect per Nom. This article is an example of exactly the kind of article for which the editor reverting the attempts at clean-up was already sanctioned at ANI and which we already held a very well-attended AFD discussion on which concluded that they should be redirected to district level unless an actual reliably-sourced article could be written about them. Reverting attempts at clean-up is some serious "I didn't hear that" behaviour that leaves people with few options other than a further trip to ANI that really shouldn't be necessary and which I hope we can avoid.

Turning to the sourcing presently in the article:

• http://www.bismil.gov.tr/ - doesn't mention the subject.
• Yerelnet - unreliable algorithm-generated content.
• Timeanddate.com - unreliable algorithm-generated content.
• haratir.com - unreliable algorithm-generated content.

As it stands this article is basically unsourced. My WP:BEFORE picked up only an apparently algorithm-generated story about a power-outage in a list of places in which Aşağıdolay was included, a bare gazetteer listing from a precursor to the unreliable (for whether a place was populated or not) GEONet Names Server database, and sources showing the same. There is no coverage of any other kind that I could find. FOARP (talk) 20:03, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

• Keep per the outcome of a much more recent AfD on the same subject where the nom had to backtrack and withdraw(!). Pinging those AfD partipants: @Styyx, Necrothesp, Ingratis, SportingFlyer, and Pharaoh of the Wizards:. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:17, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

WP:CANVASS. FOARP (talk) 10:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

WP:TAGTEAM. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:56, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

• Comment about YerelNET. This site was a part of the public sector in Turkey. It was run by tr:Türkiye ve Orta Doğu Amme İdaresi Enstitüsü, which is owned by the government. However, this institute was closed in 2018, and with it, the website was shut down (you weren't able to access it for some period). Now it's back again and has a different scope than the old one, and no one really knows who runs it as the "About us" section explains the above and only adds that it was re-founded in 2020 by "a non-profit group of education lovers". The current website is unreliable, but, the site you see in the archive is (or rather was) run by the government, making it reliable. Also appears to have a primary school, I'll look to see if I can fix this thing today. ~Styyx^{Talk? ^-^} 10:29, 20 December 2021 (UTC)