Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santo Angel (Ilog)

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 Redirect to San Pablo City, and all relevant information can be merged. MessedRocker (talk) (write these articles) 02:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Santo Angel (Ilog)

Santo Angel (Ilog) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is a barangay. A barangay is the smallest political unit in the Philippines, a part of either a city or municipality, so they are NOT towns. So given the small size of barangays, naturally, almost all of them would not be notable, even though they'd have high populations. The only barangays that should be notable may be barangays that have large significant literature about them. This barangay doesn't have any. --Howard the Duck 03:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. —Canley (talk) 04:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep geography based subjects should have inherent notability. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • That means everything on earth is notable? LOL. --Howard the Duck 05:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Not necessarily. There comes a point when some geographical unit is too small or too trivial that it doesn't deserve its own article and should instead be aggregated elsewhere. A blanket statement like "X's have inherent notability" is not a good argument in itself. You have to back it up with more substantial arguments. --seav (talk) 01:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Geography:"Geological features named on maps, such as Willow Creek Pass (Montana), are verifiable and so acceptable".--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Our house is seen on our municipal map. If you'd want to verify, visit the municipal engineer. So is it OK for Wikipedia? --Howard the Duck 02:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Please note that Common Outcomes is not a guideline much less policy. It just documents what's been the result of many AfD and is not policy. So appealing to it is also not a convincing argument in itself. So it would be best if you argue about saving this article on the subject's merits. I have plainly stated my reasons being that there can be no reliable sources about these barangays from which to source a full article about it. Note that I haven't said that there shouldn't be any mention about these barangays in Wikipedia, just that barangays don't deserve individual articles. I should know, I'm Filipino. --seav (talk) 09:24, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Almost all barangays in the Philippines are not notable enough in themselves to merit individual articles in Wikipedia and there is a problem of getting enough reliable sources to create a full-fledged article. A simple Google search does not turn up any non-trivial sources that refer to this barangay. --seav (talk) 06:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per Seav and Howard--Lenticel ^(talk) 09:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Redirect instead to the San Pablo City article (under the barangays section). Deleting it would have removed information that could have been valuable to the locals living in that certain area. besides, I'm a native of San pablo City [not barangay Santo Angel (Ilog)] and other unnotable articles (with good content) should be transfered instead to the articles of the town, where the barangay is located. Example, you're planning to delete Barangay 41 in G City (example only). Since the barangay is possibly well known, then the text regarding that barangay will be moved to the G City article. And if it is too big, well create it on your own userpages. Problem solved. -iaNLOPEZ1115 TaLKBaCK Vandalize it UBX 09:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I dunno what info from this article maybe merged to San Pablo City, perhaps the info on Lake Calibato's location and the watershed but everything else can be discarded. If you want, create a table on the barangay section with the residing brgy. captain, area, population and fiesta. --Howard the Duck 09:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
• Merge to "San Pablo City". Only notable data are the following: population census as of May 2000 (click "Region IV-Southern Tagalog" then "Laguna") and a resort located in the barangay that was mentioned in Yahoo! Travel. Starczamora (talk) 04:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, political units in all countries should have articles. --Oldak Quill 02:02, 10 February 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.