Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Stångenäs Hundred

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. – Alphax ^τεχ 02:14, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Stångenäs Hundred

This article is stubby and nonencyclopedic and should be deleted. -Soltak 22:44, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep this useful and encyclopaedical article. Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch 23:31, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
  • User has less than 50 edits. Account appears to have been opened for the purpose of trolling vfd. Wile E. Heresiarch 01:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Real place, real people, even if the name is no longer used. Lots of Swedish hundreds have short articles that are in the process of expansion. I've added the appropriate stub template so that at least editors know this is one of them. Grutness...wha? 01:31, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep, obviously. The hundreds were one of the main administrative and judicial divisions in Scandinavia for its entire known history, probably from prehistoric times until (in the case of Sweden) the mid-20th century. Uppland 07:06, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Real place in Sweden. I think the nomination is in bad faith. — JIP | Talk 07:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Any particular reason to think so? Uppland 07:55, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: the nominator has made an attempt to nominate the category this article belongs to, Category:Hundreds of Bahusia for deletion (see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Hundreds of Bahusia), but categories don't go on VfD, they should be listed on WP:CFD. If the articles it contains would be deleted, deletion of the category may be a matter of discussion and the nominator can make a new attempt by going through proper channels. I assume the VfD of the category can be regarded as invalid; however, I am not removing the VfD tag, but will let an admin decide what to do. Uppland 07:50, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: I don't have the ambition of doing it all by myself, but if we were to add some contents to the pages about hundreds then it would prove they have notability. --Fred-Chess 19:18, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
    • I agree. I started doing so on Ulleråker Hundred the last time, based on NF and another book available on Project Runeberg. (Wiglaf has added some Old Norse references, as well.) It will take time to do so for the whole country, but it can certainly be done. Maps for the hundreds would also be nice. Uppland 19:33, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, as for reasons stated above. I'd like to have a comment from the nominator as to why this particular article is "nonencyclopedic". As to the "stubby" reason... Well... There are thousands of stubs out there. Go nominate them. -- Elisson • Talk 19:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Another silly nomination that takes time and effort from Wikipedians.--Wiglaf 19:06, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

• Due to the obvious and overwhelming opposition to my motion, I officially withdraw this request for deletion. -Soltak 19:56, 31 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.