Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fontão River

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. ✗plicit 03:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fontão River

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article unsourced since 2009. Searching Rio Fontão or Fontão river in GNews, GBooks and GNewspaper Archives did not turn any results. Google Maps shows a place called Fontão which is near a river called Limia instead. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Portugal. Lenticel ^(talk) 01:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note - Creator is blocked as a sockpuppet --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can find a single reference in this blog site but the link through to Google maps doesn’t show a river at that location, so it seems to be a non notable creek. Mccapra (talk) 06:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete under G5 and possibly A3. SportingFlyer T·C 20:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure its a good idea to G5 an article created in 2009 even though it does meet G5 I think over 14 years and 4 months is enough to say the statutes of limitations may have expired though I'm at the same time not really opposed give its still a substub. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Substub with zero context other than an entire country + Tobias Conradi sockpuppet as creator (c.f. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive236#Tobias Conradi: Still community banned?) = delete. Uncle G (talk) 15:26, 28 February 2024 (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.