Talk:Big Slide Mountain

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Big Slide Mountain (New York) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:03, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does this article provide enough informational value?

This article is a mountain index list article with three entries: one with a WP article, two without. According to WP:LISTPURP, list articles in mainspace should have either an informational purpose, a navigational purpose, or both.

I think it's clear that this article has no navigational value --- there's only one blue link. Does it have enough informational value? Is it encyclopedic? There is no bright line or strict guideline here: I'm curious what other editors think.

Pinging involved editors: Wwoods, ElectroChip123, Station1 —hike395 (talk) 15:06, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like other similar mountain SIAs to me and does provide some basic sourced info. But I don't feel strongly about it and defer to what others decide. Station1 (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Back in the day, I found that there were the two other mountains with similar names, and higher elevations than the one in the Adirondacks. So I made this an index rather than a redirect, anticipating that they might someday get pages. But they haven't yet, so, I dunno.... —WWoods (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It really wouldn't take much effort to create Big Slide Mountain (Oregon) given the already provided GNIS link. Could that page ever be anything more than just a stub page with an infobox though? I would guess that the mountain in New York would have higher notability than the one in Oregon given the New York mountain is in the Adirondack High Peaks. I would not have an objection to making the New York mountain the main article with this existing index page becoming a disambiguation page. RedWolf (talk) 04:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]