Zajączkowo-Wybudowanie: a bot operated by retired editor Kotniski .  Name means literally "Zajączkowo-Construction".  As is visible from satellite images , this is actually a small industrial estate, and is described as a part of Zajączkowo on the Polish regulation on place-names (see p. 2518 here ).  I could not find a listing for this place on the Polish government statistical database , though this holds data for Zajączkowo going back to 1988.  Importantly, businesses located at this site list their location simply as "Zajączkowo" (see here as an example, here for another), which is no surprise as "[placename]-construction" would be a weird way to describe your address anywhere in the world.  As such this place fails WP:GEOLAND , since it is not a legally-recognised populated place, but instead just a part of another place with no specific status of its own.  Even if it did pass WP:GEOLAND , no page is needed for it per WP:NOPAGE .  This is likely another example of Polish communist-era infrastructure (e.g., state farms, forestry offices, mills etc.) being included as a territorial unit (probably some kind of no-longer-existent communist-era construction-related site), and then turned into a Wikipedia article by bots and bot-like editing.  I'm agnostic about deletion or just redirecting to Zajączkowo - either is good.  TL;DR - fails WP:GEOLAND , WP:NOPAGE , WP:GNG , WP:NCORP .  FOARP ( talk ) 13:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland .  FOARP ( talk ) 13:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Stok ?  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 01:13, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I corrected the article, coordinates and sources in Polish official documents.  Formally it is part of the village.  "XXX-Wybudowanie" referred to small settlements emerging outside the village of XXX.  Articles about places in Poland are available on pl.wikipedia and are verified with the database of the Statistical and Geographical Office.  Every town with SIMC listed is an official town in Poland.  If in doubt, I advise you to check the SIMC field in the Polish article.  Stok ( talk ) 06:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for responding.  "Every town with SIMC listed is an official town in Poland" - the issue is that SIMCs were also given to many things that manifestly aren't towns, villages, or even hamlets, but instead state farms, railway stations, mills, forestry offices etc.  Just having a SIMC doesn't mean that something is or was a town.  FOARP ( talk ) 08:29, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Piotrus ,@ Stok - Also, though my Polish is far from great (as you will know if you ever read anything I've written in Polish!) translating miejscowośc as "town" I think may be causing a some misunderstandings.  In English, a "town" is an inhabited place that is larger in size/population than a village, but smaller than a city.  Villages, hamlets, farms, etc. are not "towns".  Whilst miejscowośc can be translated as "town" in some contexts, I think in the context of TERYT and the Polish regulation on place names, miejscowośc may be better translated as "locality", since it seems to include units that are much larger than "towns" (e.g., the city of Warsaw is included on TERYT under SIMC ID 0918123) and smaller than "towns" (e.g., the small locality of Warszawa, Bytów County is included on TERYT under SIMC ID 0746998).  These are not towns, but they are locations, so "locality" seems a better fit here.  Or am I wrong here?  FOARP ( talk ) 09:07, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge or redirect to Zajączkowo, Tczew County as I don't see stand-alone notability for parts of the villages.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 09:13, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect and merge per Piotrus to Zajączkowo, Tczew County -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 00:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per Piotrus to Zajączkowo, Tczew County .  Good AtD.  // Timothy :: talk 18:20, 23 October 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: merge