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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Centum City (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)

This article is very poorly written and has only one source. Most of the sections of the article are meaningless. There are no good sources on Centum City in English. Sgroey (talk) 03:12, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The Korean counterpart of this article, ko:센텀시티, only has one source, too. This district may well be notable enough to warrant an article, but this is not the kind of article we're looking for. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:45, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and South Korea. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: need more significant coverages without this can't deserves standalone article. AgerJoy talk 09:14, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Really extensive coverage in the Korean language; google the Korean name and scroll around. This is a major development project in one of the most major districts of the second most important city in the country. Poorly written articles are not grounds for deletion. seefooddiet (talk) 11:03, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it's that extensive, then cite three good sources. That should be easy for you to do, with this plenitude that you speak of. I got Instagram accounts, tripadvisor, restaurant opening hours, wikis, and advertisements. Uncle G (talk) 09:15, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 02:31, 23 February 2025 (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.