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 speedy keep. (non-admin closure) —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nowiny Kryszkowskie[edit]

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

Places defined solely for the purpose of taking a census are not notable per WP:GEOLAND Tylr00 (talk) 13:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think that this is a place defined solely for the purpose of taking a census? It appears on maps, as can be seen by clicking on the coordinates and following through, and maps have nothing to do with censuses. 14:05, 5 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.222.157 (talk)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GEOLAND: "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable". No reason to believe that the place is defined solely for the purpose of taking a census. — Kpalion^(talk) 09:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per WP:GEOLAND. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:49, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Per WP:GEOLAND. Clearly satisfies it. Smartyllama (talk) 14:59, 8 September 2016 (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.