Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Populated place
I wish I could simply argue that the term is |useful, since I use it in the articles I write about places, to contrast it with a "locale" which is pretty much just a name attached to a piece of nowhere, but it's not a good AfD argument. I did http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Populated_place&diff=440366241&oldid=440352429 add a bit showing that the term is used generally in the field of cartography. I'm looking for more information about the various uses of the term, but much of what I found is in obscure GIS works and they're a bit too scholarly for my brain to handle today. I think there is more information out there, though if it still ends up being merely a |dicdef then deletion might make sense. Some Darkness|dicdefs, however, can actually address many aspects of a term beyond its definition. Note that |six years of not being expanded is not usually considered a valid reason for deletion
— User:Valfontis, 20:39, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:USEFUL||WP:DICDEF||WP:NOEFFORT (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)