Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Geography

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Geography. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Geography|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Geography. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Geography/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Geography

Pershing, Indiana

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

Once again we have an argument between Baker and the maps, because the latter indicate this to be an Erie Railroad station; all that's around it are several farmsteads, but nothing that says "town". The eponymous bridge is actually a mile and a half north of town, or at least, it used to be before it collapsed. Once again, a county history would have been nice, but as it is, I can't verify this. Mangoe (talk) 22:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Zion, Fulton County, Indiana

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

Here we have a significant mess, because until the GNIS people changed it, the maps all read "Wagoner" at this point, not "Mt. Zion". They did this on the basis of "The American Guide Series, Compiled and Written by the Federal Writers' Project of the Work Projects Administration." If anyone can get their hands on the Indiana volume, things might be explained better. As it is, there's no obvious settlement here, but there are two "Mt. Zion" things: a cemetery, and the "Mt. Zion Mill Pond", whcih indeed created by a dam that had to be repaired and restocked with game fish after a breach around 1990. There's no helpful turn-of-the-century county history here or anything else that illuminates this. Mt. Zion suggests a church, not a town, especially attached to a cemetery. And where did Wagoner come from? Again, there's no sign now of a settlement as such. Mangoe (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:10, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Green Oak, Indiana

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

Baker describes it as a post office, and that's what the maps and aerials show. Mangoe (talk) 13:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:50, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokrzywnica-Kolonia

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

This article was created by now long-inactive Kotbot, there is no equivalent article in the Polish wikipedia, and no reference can be found in TERYT (https://eteryt.stat.gov.pl/eTeryt/rejestr_teryt/udostepnianie_danych/baza_teryt/uzytkownicy_indywidualni/wyszukiwanie/wyszukiwanie.aspx?contrast=default) Kiwipete (talk) 07:46, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reasons:

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all This appears to be a duplication of Gmina Pokrzywnica under another name? Kolonia Osieck is not a place, although Gmina Osieck is an administrative district, which happens to contain a Kolonia Pogorzel. I'm not up on Poland or indeed Polish, but on that basis alone, getting rid of all of this dubious cruft seems to be a good thing, per WP:TNT. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:08, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convent Wood

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

This feels WP:TOOSOON and exclusively uses primary and unreliable sources, along with original research in the form of maps. You can redirect with Great North Wood which offers a broader concept of the topic. Jinnllee90 (talk) 03:58, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This should probably be closed; instead propose merging and redirecting the article as an alternative to deletion. I don't know why the sources would be considered unreliable but they don't do anything more than mention the name and show it as part of the Great North Wood - if it created recently it would have probably been moved to the Draft namespace. It is also not original research to use maps, depending on how they are used, it's just that a name and symbol on a map is not significant coverage. Sources not currently in the article should also be considered (WP:NEXIST), and some can be found including https://www.wildlondon.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/GNW%20Toolkit.pdf and https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/The_Wood_that_Built_London/vgQ_EAAAQBAJ, also https://insidecroydon.com/2022/05/18/great-north-wood-under-threat-from-holy-orders-3-5m-scheme/ (although I'm unsure of its reliability and there could be better sources for it). Peter James (talk) 22:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis Park, Virginia

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

GNIS stub for insignificant subdivision in Fairfax County, VA. WP:BEFORE yields unrelated results and links to sites like Zillow and Nextdoor. Waddles 🗩 🖉 16:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, United States of America, and Virginia. Waddles 🗩 🖉 16:21, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOLAND or at least find a suitable WP:ATD. It's a populated place just looking at images in google maps. There are houses and businesses.4meter4 (talk) 17:34, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4: There are no businesses here aside from any random home businesses. This is a small residential subdivision within another populated place that is the CDP of Braddock, Virginia. If that doesn't indicate that lack of notability of this place, per WP:GEOLAND, residential subdivisions could be considered notable on a case-by-case basis, given non-trivial coverage by their name in multiple, independent reliable sources, but there are no independent reliable sources covering this topic that I could find, which would prove the notability of this development. Waddles 🗩 🖉 22:50, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Housing development/subdivision, not a notable community. I don't see any businesses, it's just a small suburban neighborhood. Merely being a populated place with houses does not entitle it to an article or even mention elsewhere – GEOLAND2 applies, not 1. Reywas92^Talk 19:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No opinion on whether this should be merged or redirected somewhere, but this area is a few minutes from where I live, and the entire region is dotted with otherwise indistinguishable neighborhoods with commercially cute names. There is really nothing to be kept as an article. It is a few streets, not a distinctive neighborhood. BD2412 T 20:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete There continues to be a lot of legalism about the wording of WP:GEOLAND but the usual rule has been that subdivisions need to satisfy GNG, which they almost never do. And this isn't an exception. I also would like to point out that the topo maps are highly inconsistent about whether or not to label subdivisions. Mangoe (talk) 19:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Higlada

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

No sources for at least the past 6 years. Online (english language, at least) sources seem to either reference this wiki page or be autogenerated in some other way. Honestly not sure if it still meets WP:GEOLAND so submitting here rather than PROD. Smallangryplanet (talk) 14:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Africa, Ethiopia, and Somalia. Smallangryplanet (talk) 14:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It seems to exist [1], but it's still lacking any sort of coverage other than a name in a list. Oaktree b (talk) 15:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Gazetteer of Somalia (an older version of the GEOnet Names Server data) only mentions a hill "Higlada Camoore" and a wadi "Dohda Higlada" in other areas of Somalia, but this place exists (sources in https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1404221614, also in Bing Maps) - is there a list it can be redirected to? Higlada, Somaliland (the same place, it's on the border) was redirected to Salahlay but is not useful without a mention. Peter James (talk) 23:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Lake Station, Indiana

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

Another case where Baker actually says this was a post office, and yes, the topos show it was the site of a rail station. And there's nothing much there now. The lake, btw, is two miles to the west. Mangoe (talk) 11:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:50, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catalan Bay Cave

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

I see now evidence of notability. Unlike many caves in this area, it isn't an archeological site, and I couldn't find any wp:sigcov Kingsmasher678 (talk) 18:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per above - there are two sources in the stub now, and I can find the Cave on at least three “olde time” maps, but arguably it’s not significant enough. Bearian (talk) 18:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bellman's Cave

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

No WP:SIGCOV. No reliable sources, and my WP:BEFORE didn't find any. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The best that I can find is an article in a web site of abandoned locations and this, which is a kind of tourist guide. The remainder that I found had copied the WP article. Nothing comes up that is a reliable source. I don't know if it would make sense to link to either of these from the entry in the List of caves in Gibraltar. None of the caves there have references. Lamona (talk) 02:55, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per above. However, for the record, a travel guide can be a reliable source when independent of the place, for examples, Michelin guides or Lonely Planet. Bearian (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

George's Bottom Cave

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

Merge to Upper Rock Nature Reserve. Create a new section there for Tina's Fissure, this cave, and Levant Cave. Not notable independently, and only found coverage from blogs or passing coverage. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 18:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 18:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: has one paragraph of coverage, found here: https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/20769321/upper-rock-nature-reserve-a-management-and-action-plan. Not enough to justify an independent article, should still be merged. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 18:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Transwikify or delete per WP:NOTDICT. Mathglot (talk) 22:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Mathglot (talk) 22:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ping DanCherek, contributor. Mathglot (talk) 22:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Mathglot (talk) 22:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Mathglot (talk) 22:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Set and drift, where the concept is explained in more detail. This is something most every manual of naval navigation would talk about and is likely a notable topic on its own. But we already have an article on set and drift, so readers would be best served by a redirect to the better and better referenced article. Drift is also discussed in multiple places in Dead reckoning; that could be a good target, too, but Set and drift is more focused on the particular concept of drift and so may be a better target. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 03:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Set and drift per User:Mark viking. Reasonable ATD. Bearian (talk) 03:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muthappan Kavu

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

No sources for this village itself since 2009, possibly needs a rename if not a delete? I can find lots of references to the festival and to Muthappan, but the only one I can find for this village in particular is this wiki article. Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism, India, and Kerala. Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:02, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or possibly re-write. No evidence of notability. I have found a few sources referencing a temple of this name, but not a village. I can't even find anything with this name, let along a village, located on Google Maps, Bing Maps, or Apple Maps. I was able to find a temple with the name "Muthappan Kavu" on OpenStreetMaps, but not a village. Whoever created this article may have been talking about the Muthappan Kavu temple. A re-write or recreation of the article about the temple of the same name might be a possible alternative to deletion, but the temple is of questionable notability, too. GranCavallo (talk) 15:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Muthappan. All signs point to: Muthappan Kavu is not a village. At first I was going to suggest redirecting to Memunda, since the article about Memunda already mentions Muthappan Kavu as a local "religious attraction". But as it turns out, in Google Maps you can find multiple places of worship with Muthappan Kavu in the name across multiple locations, and this article in The Hindu uses it is a generic term. There is, however, a Muthappan Kavu Road (not notable). Cielquiparle (talk) 05:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG, I did an extensive check when trying to find sources for this in English and Malayalam and couldn't, only things like this. Coeusin (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No sources on the page and I can not find any significant coverage on this village to pass notability. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 14:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:V. I just had a conversation today at Wikimedia NYC about all these alleged human habitations that were created from gazetteers that were inaccurate. Bearian (talk) 03:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vine, Indiana

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

Another "Baker calls it a village and there was a post office but there's nothing there" spot. Searching turned up nothing but considering I had to add the county just to get rid of the Indiana VINE system, I'm hardly confident. Mangoe (talk) 03:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GEOLAND as a formerly populated place.4meter4 (talk) 03:44, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning delete, as it is not clear that there is evidence of such a place ever having existed. If it did, then the location is now subsumed in Attica, Indiana (which is the city address given for the cemetery now located at the geographic coordinates given for Vine). BD2412 T 03:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:51, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to WP:V problems. Where does it say it was a populated place? Geschichte (talk) 10:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "formerly populated place" is not a basis for notability even if these were actually supported by sources – it would have to be officially recognized, which a short-lived post office does not do. Reywas92^Talk 14:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Reywas92: I would not be averse to a merge and redirect (of what little content there is) to Attica, Indiana, per WP:ATD. The geocoordinates now basically resolve to a "Vine Street", which is all the remnant left of there ever having been something broader under the name. BD2412 T 17:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mediterranean Cave

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

Non-notable, fails WP:GNG. Can't access the book, but the name suggests that it likely has only passing coverage. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Europe. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This cave is important, as are the others linked in the Caves of Gibraltar navbox at the bottom of the article . Per the external links I just added: HM Government of Gibraltar Ministry for Heritage; and also National Geographic — Maile (talk) 23:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You clearly didn't read that Nat Geo article, because it says that the cave being discussed is off the coast of France. The other article links it's entire content to the website here, but that is a self-published blog. Neither of these are a reliable source.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 05:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I may have found a source: [2], which was cited by another source [3]. PrinceTortoise (he/him) ^{(poke • inspect)} 09:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~That source is primary. Topic fails WP:GNG even if the book has significant coverage. Delete.~~ PrinceTortoise (he/him) ^{(poke • inspect)} 09:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've only looked for ten minutes and I can see its notability by reference to the government, the illustrated London News, and a noted academic. There seems to be insufficient research before the nomination. Being an unreliable source isnt catching. Just because (for instance) The Times quotes a blog it doesnt then write off its long history or reputation for reliability. Victuallers (talk) 17:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've shown up in a bunch of these, say something like this, and then don't link your sources. I'm happy to withdraw noms if I think I'm wrong, but please provide sources and don't just tell people the exist. If I could have found them, I wouldn't have nominated! I also don't appreciate the bit about insufficient research. Also, if the Times lifted all its words nearly word for word from the blog, and then published as fact, I would never quote that, because its basically just the blog. A good source can still produce sloppy journalism.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 17:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Only because there are a "bunch of these". The blog that gets quoted by the Times (say) becomes more notable. Sure mistakes happen but we AGF good sources. If the government expert websites are quoting someone then they think s/he is notable than we usually assume - and they may be right. The sources you requested are quoted in the article. Sorry if you "don't appreciate" but there are a "bunch of these". Victuallers (talk) 23:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed my point. Just because I can't find sources doesn't mean I didn't do enough research. It just mean that I only know so much about it. It's not shocking that someone with 165k edits has better research abilities than me, and it's not cool to assume that I didn't do a before. Just point something out without the attitude, that's all.

As a side note, those are excellent sources and I think I can get at least a B class article out of them. Changing to keep, per sources I couldn't find.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:56, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Striking my delete. Thanks Victuallers. PrinceTortoise (he/him) ^{(poke • inspect)} 01:18, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I think that I am allowed to withdraw. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets GNG and WP:NATFEAT. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Levant Cave

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

Not independently notable. Should be to be redirected or merged to Upper Rock Nature Reserve. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Europe. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Higher Menadew

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

Definitely not notable enough to be included here; only search results lead to some tourist farm cottages. In short an irrelevant place that doesn’t exactly hold any value or significance, this small farm. KrystalInfernus (talk) 18:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. Shellwood (talk) 18:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is an OS settlement[[4]] even if it is little more than a single farm but could be merged with Luxulyan, its parish. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:43, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Appears to be little more than a single farm with associated buildings. I can't see any signs to it. However, the farmhouse is a listed building, so it could be repurposed per WP:GEOFEAT. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Some maps show it with an alternative spelling "Menadue", but I couldn't find either in current Ordnance Survey data. Royal Mail postcode search finds the farm, a barn, a cottage at the farm, and "Higher Menadue" with six other properties, and https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/CON/Luxulyan mentions it as one of the villages in the parish; I could also find it in gazetteers but unlikely to be enough for an article. Peter James (talk) 00:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Graham, Indiana

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

Baker doesn't cite his entries so I have no idea why he stated that this was a village. On the topos it looks like a rail spot, but there is just nothing there. If there ever was a village, it disappeared long ago. We need more than this. Mangoe (talk) 01:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no evidence of notability. Could ultimately end up as a redirect. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:43, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't think there is a good reason to doubt Baker that this was once a populated place. Passes WP:GEOLAND.4meter4 (talk) 02:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is reason for doubt. We've been doing this for some years now, and we've gotten quite a bit of experience dealing with the various kinds of sources involved and reading the maps for verification. And what we found with GNIS also applies here: that some of these sources are being abused to some extent, because we are at cross-purposes with the authors. In the case of GNIS (and you need to read WP:GNIS if you haven't already) the issue was compounded by the mistakes the GNIS compilers made in looking at literally very label on every map in the country (plus other, far more dubious sources), but the issue in making articles here was that people made the default assumption that a name was a town, even though the purpose of GNIS was to standardize the names. Placenames origin books have the same issue: they are also about the names first of all and only secondarily about what they are attached to. And the rigor of these books varies. Durham out in California was meticulous about citing his sources, and the problems with him as a source were usually traced to misrepresentation of what he wrote. Baker, not as much. The general rule for the placename books is that if they say it was something other than a village, that generally fits with what we find on the maps and elsewhere; but if they say it was a village, that may or may not be borne out. If they or some other source says it was platted, that usually is borne out in the maps, because they will show a street grid; but we've had a couple of cases where a turn-of-the-century county history says "yeah, it was platted, but nothing ever came of it." These histories also have the tremendous advantage of being much closer in time to the origins of these places; in many cases the events are within living memory, whereas Baker was writing some sixty years later. So I'm disinclined to take Baker's villages at face value; we need something more. Unfortunately I have not found a county history in this case. Mangoe (talk) 13:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, problems with WP:V. Geschichte (talk) 07:02, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Rural post offices and rail points were often named after the local landowner; that doesn't make them a "community", let along a recognized populated place. Given the many articles sourced only to Baker with no other information found anywhere, I don't think that book alone should count for verifiability or notability. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 11:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Facts supporting this community as being a notable one are too thin on the ground to establish it beyond a local level (if even that).TH1980 (talk) 02:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Layton, Indiana

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

Baker, whom we do not cite, describes this as short-lived post office, with no other detail. That's consistent with the topos, which show a single farm across the road from the tracks. No evidence for a settlement beyond that. Mangoe (talk) 02:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I agree after some research that Layton was never a community, it was just a place name at most arising from the post office (which lingers on maps), and it would be a good guess that the post office was at the homestead of someone named Layton at that location.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 13:19, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per all of the above.TH1980 (talk) 02:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Das verfluchte Jungfernloch

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

I don't believe this is notable. It is mentioned as existing in folklore, which it does. However, these references don't feel notable to me. IDK, y'all help me out! Kingsmasher678 (talk) 05:01, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:19, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep my German isn't very good, but there's references to this cave in books on a quick Google search and caves have very low notability thresholds. "These references don't feel notable to me" is a bad deletion rationale. SportingFlyer T·C 07:16, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let me clarify that. When I did my before search, I could only find sources that resolved to one or two sources. These were fairytales form around 1850-ish. However, there wasn't coverage of the cave. It might be worth having a article on the fairytale, but the current article dosent have adequate sourcing. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wilson's Cave

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

Links in ref's are broken, and all the info is sourced from the one referenced book. That book list many, many caves, and inclusion does not make this one notable. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 05:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See [5] Page 18 and [6] page 276: "a site of major archaeological significance". The cave contained mammoth bones, implements, Neolithic ware and bronze rings from 600 BC. Or possibly redirect to Gorham's Cave. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Second is a clear passing mention, first has some merit. The mere presence of bones doesn't make something notable, and this is passing converage.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 17:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is some confusion with Gorham's Cave. If they are the same, redirect. Otherwise, first ref and existing refs is enough to keep. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upper All's Well Cave

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

Clearly nonotable. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 05:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The content and image are worth keeping if minimal; I think these should be merged to some larger article in my opinion. Mrfoogles (talk) 07:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What should be the merge target?

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tina's Fissure

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

Redirect or merge to Gibraltar Nature Reserve. Not independently notable. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 05:10, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Gibraltar Nature Reserve. Very little coverage in sources, does not appear separately notable. AusLondonder (talk) 13:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spider Cave (Gibraltar)

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

Redirect toGibraltar Nature Reserve where it is located. Not indepentely notable. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 05:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak merge absent sources being found (did a light check) into Mediterranean Steps or Gibraltar Nature Reserve -- noting there are many caves listed in List of caves in Gibraltar, so as a whole the caves are probably notable. Mrfoogles (talk) 07:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or redirect is fine by me.

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lochiel, Indiana

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

Here we have something of a puzzle. Baker describes it as a post office; google searches produce a railroad liability case from the 1910s in which a girl boards a train here, though the earliest topo I could find, from 1963, shows no trace of a rail line. Another hit is for a grain elevator, and that is still there, or some similar business. But that's it, except for a single house next to the facility. It's very rare for a rail line to evaporate that entirely, so I'm not utterly convinced that these hits all refer to the same place; but all in all I'd say there is a lack of evidence for a settlement here. A rail station seems the best fit. Mangoe (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the citogenesis in this one is strong... I can get a Bitcoin ATM, a sexual harrassment lawyer and all number of other things near Lochiel, which has been an article since 2009. The one thing you won't find anywhere near Lochiel is a citation. There's nothing there beyond, as nom says, a grain facility. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:06, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turpachita

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

There is no such village in Kyrgyzstan. Most likely, they meant a mountain pass Турпачаты. Mitte27 (talk) 11:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Kyrgyzstan. Mitte27 (talk) 11:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to Osh Region. Article cites no sources. Available sources on the internet do not seem to establish notability and therefore fails WP:GNG TNM101 (chat) 11:29, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It might be more correct to redirect to the article Pamir-Alay. Mitte27 (talk) 11:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at OpenStreetMap shows a hamlet with the name турпачаты, though it's not very large and I can't otherwise confirm it. GNG also isn't the guideline for villages - we just need to prove they exist, which will be hard in this instance. SportingFlyer T·C 07:27, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or redirect? If the latter, where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:29, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pamir-Alay – As WP:ATD per Mitte27, with is more accurate. Svartner (talk) 04:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We can’t verify if this is a human settlement or a mountain pass. Bearian (talk) 03:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chato, Peru

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

The one source linked is invalid and I am unable to find any source at all proving this place is real. Might be a hoax article. Jolielover (talk) 15:33, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 8. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Peru-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I doubt this article was made by a hoax, as it is made by a long-time editor who is still active today. Those types of editors rarely make hoaxes. Thoughts, @Bejnar? -1ctinus📝🗨 19:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Is there some way of involving Spanish-language editors on ADFs involving Spanish-language topics in articles? Searching for small towns / villages has is often difficult for towns in English-speaking countries and using English language sources. In this case, the search is further complicated by the need to search Spanish-language sources and using names rendered into English. Paul H. (talk) 19:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source is now https://geonames.nga.mil/geon-ags/rest/services/RESEARCH/GIS_OUTPUT/MapServer/0/query?outFields=*&where=ufi+%3D+-341758 - it says it's the same as es:Chato Chico; there is also es:Chato Grande in the same area so whether "Chato" can only refer to Chato Chico or to both, or is a combination or both places or just an ambiguous name is unclear. The article should probably be moved to Chato Chico. Peter James (talk) 17:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Actually, I agree that moving the article and name to Chato Chico is appropriate. A report on disaster preparedness said in its introduction, [translated] "The Cura Mori District was created by Law No. 15434 of February 19, 1965, initially consisting of the towns of Cucungará as capital, Pozo de los Ramos, Chato Grande, Chato Chico, Pueblo Nuevo, Buenos Aires, Santa Rosa, Fundo Casaraná, Vega Monteverde, La Para and the town of Chato." Plan de Prevención y Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres 2020-2022 (PDF). July 2020.. Law No. 15434 sets out the borders, and says in part, [translated] "follow this boundary line to the summit of Loma Blanca and continue until you find the Tabanco road, extending to the Piura River bed, following its course, upstream, it reaches the point of the royal road that borders the town of Chato, continuing to the outer part of the urban area;".

I am not sure why the NGA cross-identified Chato with Chato Chico, but sources now talk about Nuevo Chato Chico in reports like Municipalidad Distrital de Cura Mori. Plan de Prevención y Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres 2019-2021 (PDF)..

As an aside, the hamlet (case or caserio) of Chato Grande is now quite separate as it was incorporated in 2013 into a new municipality called "Almirante Grau" along with the population centers of the hamlets of Nuevo Paraíso, Ciudad Noé and Nuevo San Pedro. This nugget of information is found in the first report cited above.

It is possible that the town of Chato (pueblo de Chato) of 1965 is the Nuevo Chato Chico of the 2020s. I found nothing explicit saying so. But the town clearly exists both visually and in documentation. --Bejnar (talk) 00:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't understand why there are doubts about the existence of this place. Google Maps found it in less than a second with a search for "Chato, Peru", and locates it where the article says it is. Athel cb (talk) 08:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hykeham Memorial

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

Hykeham Memorial is not a place, certainly not a "suburb". It is a ward for elections to North Hykeham Town Council. There is nothing more to say about it, although some demographic statistics exist. It is not notable. (The one mildly interesting thing about it might have been an explanation of its name, as the North Hykeham Memorial Hall is within the ward and presumably gave it the name, but this has not been included.Perhaps the mentions of the Memorial Hall and park in the North Hykeham article could be enhanced with a "(which gives its name to Memorial ward)", but that's all that's needed.)

I note that North Hykeham#Governance does not mention the individual wards, and suggest that a list of wards there would be more appropriate than this article and others, for wards which have no existence except as lines on a map to define, for now, the electorate for lowest-level local elections. Hykeham Memorial is not notable, and Wikipedia does not need this article. PamD 14:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and England. PamD 14:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment while we're at it, what's with Hykeham, an utterly pointless "article" that began as an attempt to avoid a railway station from being a red-link, and now attempts to join the substantial urban area of North Hykeham with a couple of country lanes on a map that are south of it and identified as South Hykeham, but really have nothing much in common apart from being adjacent. The railway station that engendered Hykeham is nowhere near South Hykeham and should better have been redirected to North Hykeham. Elemimele (talk) 15:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies to the residents of South Hykeham, which does indeed exist. I have nominated Hykeham for AfD as an unnecessary dab with only two targets, unhelpful to readers. As for Hykeham Memorial, I personally see no value in articles covering the demographics of this low level of electoral region, but I defer to those who enjoy such things. Elemimele (talk) 15:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We have no need for articles about wards of parishes and it is not a good use of anybody's time to be creating them. Rcsprinter123 (orate) 22:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree there should not be articles for parish wards, but Hykeham Memorial (formerly North Hykeham Memorial) (https://statistics.data.gov.uk/atlas/resource?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fstatistics.data.gov.uk%2Fid%2Fstatistical-geography%2FE05014436), with the same boundaries as the parish ward (https://www.lgbce.org.uk/sites/default/files/2023-04/north_kesteven_order_map.pdf), is a ward of North Kesteven district. Peter James (talk) 14:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or Delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cordillera Negra (Chile)

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

This seems to be a mountain, not a mountain range, in Chile. In any case, I cannot find any references to this mountain except a dot on a map which refers to Wikipedia as its source. Fails WP:NGEO. Please note there is a mountain range with the name Cordillera Negra in Peru, but that is a different story. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 00:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Chile. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 00:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for reasons discussed by nominator. I cannot find any additional information and sources.

Paul H. (talk) 02:56, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete couldn't find sources for Chile one Who am I? / Talk to me! / What have I done? 14:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Neutral Searched for book and scholar sources but could not find any. Probably a hoax. Note the article creator is permabanned: his creations should be reviewed. --Bedivere (talk) 16:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a closer look at the topic and it seems to have been covered/mentioned in some publications, including this one by SERNAGEOMIN (geological and mining service of Chile). Also there's an offline work named Carta Geológica de la Décima Región (SUBIABRE & ROJAS, 1994), cited in this thesis, which also refers to the Cordillera Negra. --Bedivere (talk) 17:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well found, @Bedivere! If I read it correctly, the Chilean Cordillera Negra then lies in Futrono municipality, between Caunahue River to the north and Calcurrupe River and Curinilahue river to the south, between Llifén in the west and Huilo-Huilo Biological Reserve in the east. More to the west lies the Cerros de Quimán, another article created by the same permblockied user @Dentren. If this is right, I propose to redirect both Cordillera Negra (Chile) and Cerros de Quimán articles to the geography section of Los Ríos Region, where both Cordillera Negra and Cerros de Quimán should be mentioned in the paragraph on Precordillera. Or should it be under the subtitle Andes? Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 22:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precordillera would do IMO. Bedivere (talk) 00:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw The references provided by Bedivere and Fluorescent Jellyfish are enough to sustain a stand-alone article.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 21:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. The nomination has been withdrawn but there are outstanding arguments to Delete this article and a proposal to Redirect it so it can't be closed at this moment until there is a consensus for a specific outcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:34, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Refs. 1 and 2 are sufficient to indicate that this place exists and has that name. I can't check ref. 3 because I haven't got access to the book. Athel cb (talk) 09:48, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:25, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geography-related proposed deletions