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. W.marsh 16:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hayatabad Town (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Duplicates Hayatabad and has even more POV than the original. Deprodded by creator. Morgan Wick 07:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Yep, duplicated and debased content. BTLizard 07:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This one is just bad! Biased (for example Hayatabad is the most beautiful town of Peshawar", badly written (very unencyclopedic), and much, much more. Omega Archdoom^Talk 07:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Hayatabad, for duplication of subject? -- saberwyn 07:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could work, but even the Hayatabad article is poorly written, and again shows the POV used in this article (as this article is a copy). Frankly, I think both should be deleted, unless someone puts a lot of effort into fixing them up. Omega Archdoom^Talk 08:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My objection to a redirect (and the reason why I didn't just do so) is that it's an unusual title for a redirect. Also, Hayatabad appears to be a real town that may be notable. Just because the article has POV problems is not a reason to delete. Morgan Wick 15:35, 14 May 2007 (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.