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 redirect to Multan. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:40, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chenab Park[edit]

Chenab Park (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

No significant secondary independent references to establish notability. Fails WP:GNG — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 22:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Multan. Even if the sources are reliable, it's not notable enough due to lack of deep and broad coverage. Bearian (talk) 14:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:NOTDIRECTORY. I'm sure the park exists thanks to the sources, but the sources are more about greater policy on parks in the city in general. I don't see what else we can say about this park other than it exists, which is not enough. Even a redirect WP:ATD-R seems like too much since there is no mention on the target page. I don't know what could go into the city article since the sources are really about the city policy than the park and don't say what might be important about it. - 2pou (talk) 19:41, 8 June 2022 (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.