Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surmo

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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 20:16, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Surmo

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

Very little evidence that this place exists, except for google weather reports. Almost entirely unsourced. The pictures are of dubious nature and appear almost computer generated. Seems almost like a hoax. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 01:17, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —MRD2014 ^{Talk • Edits • Help!} 01:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's in Google maps, there is an AccuWeather forecast, there is a mention in a trekking guide, and here's a deafness study done in Surmo valley. Seems real to me. --Mark viking (talk) 03:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 04:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This place exists. It's in Google maps Surmo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.56.196.4 (talk) 06:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per WP:GEOLAND any legally recognised place shown to exist is notable. AusLondonder (talk) 09:16, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an exceptionally short search for "Surmo, Pakistan" on Google Books turned up numerous references to Surmo in the Shyok valley of East Pakistan. Unfortunately, I can only link you to snippets of material; a trivial reference to Surmo, a couple of minor references, a more detailed reference, but, unfortunately also only a snippet. Does not appear to be a hoax. Instead keep per WP:GEOLAND; [p]opulated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable (emphasis removed) and there's enough here to have at least a stub - article is almost entirely unsourced. Mr rnddude (talk) 15:46, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I guess it would have been smarter to just remove the unsourced conduct... sorry about that - but it just seemed really strange, especially considering the creator's other article creations. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 20:05, 5 October 2017 (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.