Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/508001

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 Delete. Not notable. Malinaccier (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 508001

508001 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Notability: there are many Pincodes in India. Why should this one Pincode have its own article? Joe Sperrazza (talk) 02:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. There are articles for a couple of high-profile ZIP codes in the United States (90210, for instance), but it's by no means universal. Given that there doesn't appear to be anything unusual about this particular pincode, I see no reason to maintain an article on it. Zetawoof_(ζ) 02:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable pincode. This appears to be the only one with its own article. One sentence with no explanation of why this pincode is important isn't enough to warrant an article. GaryColemanFan (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, per above. It belongs in a list at best. Mr. Absurd (talk) 02:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, unless, of course, we expect an article for every postal code. In other words: DeleteWVhybrid (talk) 02:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Just delete it! Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per others. No need to have an article for each code. Doctorfluffy (fart in my face) 04:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete it for obvious reasons.--Berig (talk) 12:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

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.