The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.
Failure to be verified may either mean that this information is fabricated, or is merely beyond our resources to confirm. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion. See also Wiktionary:Previously deleted entries.
Not even 3,000 hits on Google proper, and no Wikipedia article. Ignoring the issue of place name inclusion, I don't think this is significant enough even if we were including places wholesale. Dmcdevit·t 06:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete; nothing to transwiki or appendicize. -- Visviva 09:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Transwiki to WikiGazetteer, when as and if created. Should we have a holding tank for such things? DCDuring TALK 15:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- No objection to appendicizing this to Appendix:Place names/Adrasan, which is the closest thing we have to a holding tank. However, those who favor retaining this content seem to be as resistant to this solution as to deletion, so I've kind of given up on this approach. Personally I think we should just have separate namespaces for most classes of borderline content, thus keeping the actual dictionary intact (and finite) without orphaning useful material. The problem with this, of course, is that we have a rather large number of namespaces already. -- Visviva 03:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Not used poetically, etc. --Connel MacKenzie 23:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)