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

List of shiretowns in New Brunswick

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

Unnecessary list. If somebody wants to find the shiretown of every county, they are all already included in List of counties of New Brunswick. B3251_(talk) 20:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Lists, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Speedy redirect Obviously unnecessary duplicate. Reywas92^Talk 20:39, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dixon, Greene County, Indiana

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

Another rail spot (the GNIS location is wrong: older topos show it quite a bit east) now in the middle of several substantial industrial/utility/warehousing sites but no town. Mangoe (talk) 02:47, 11 December 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 December 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While there is a Dixon Cemetery a mile or so east, there was never anything at this location more than a rail crossing and a building or two. Also, the location labeled "Dixon" on the map moved due west between 2010 and 2013: [1], strongly suggesting someone made a typo in a database somewhere; not something you would expect to go uncorrected if this were a significant place.WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:39, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eitermillen

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

A very small place with no notability of its own, better as a redirect to Contern. The sources often don't support the text (e.g. despite repeated claims that Eitermillen used to be at a place now called Maulin Diderich, I don't see any of the sources making that connection?) and are passing mentions or names on maps only. None of the sources in the article are significant coverage of this tiny hamlet (a "lieu-dit" is basically a named house or group of houses, not a once independent village), and the history and demographics seem to be WP:SYNTH or WP:OR due to this lack of sources. Fram (talk) 11:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Luxembourg. Fram (talk) 11:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect I do believe the subject matter here is notable, however it appears that the article in its current state lacks in sourcing to verify claims and establish said notability. Once redirected I can once again work on a draft or in my sandbox to compile more sources and improve the article so it’s ready for the mainspace. N1TH Music (talk) 13:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an odd vortex of an article where it clearly exists on maps and in at least one source, but there's nothing else to support that source in anything that's easily searchable on the web: ie I can verify that the place exists just enough to know it's likely not a hoax, but not enough to get it past the WP:V we need for a legally recognised place. (The fact there are no page numbers for the 1889/90 source help nothing.) I'd prefer a result which allows restoration once verified. SportingFlyer T·C 04:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SportingFlyer well the source [2], it might be just a map but it’s posted on an official government owned website also if you look at the article List of Populated places in Luxembourg the sources cited is also that of a government owned website and is a database of all the legally recognised localities in Luxembourg an it lists Éitermillen. Is that not enough to pass WP:V? N1TH Music (talk) 11:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your first map shows Oetrange, Kackerterhaff, and Moutfort, but even when zoomin in no "Eitermillen" appears. Is it supposed to be where the Rue du Moulin and Route de Remich meet? Fram (talk) 11:41, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fram there’s a search bar at the top wherein you can type Eitermillen and a point appears at the location was if you click the directions icon. Either way it’s in the database. I think I’ve found a clearer link here. Also here is another webpage from the government of Luxembourg website which also mentions Eitermillen. And yes it is around where Route de Remich and Rue de Moulin meet. Is that not sufficient to pass WP:V? N1TH Music (talk) 12:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and there’s also this which is a communal document discussing all the projects completed between 2017 and 2023 in Contern and there were 2 projects in Eitermillen which is mentioned by name on page 23 and page 32. N1TH Music (talk) 12:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Page 23 says "New railings on the Eitermillen", this indicates that it isn't really a populated place but a location, building, route... You wouldn't say "new railings on Contern", that would make no sense. Fram (talk) 12:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fram might be a translation error, here’s the french version also those steps can’t refer to a building because there’s no building there, what they’re referring to is this path which is a public footpath connection 2 streets, there isn’t even a building there. Also what about the other citations I listed here. N1TH Music (talk) 13:08, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't looked at everything: after a map which doesn't mention Eitermillen, and a communal document stating that they will add railings to a path named Eitermillen, I now checked this one you gave, where the closest I can find is Hëttermillen, which is also the only results I get when searching that website for Eitermillen[3]. So, after three wild goose chases, I stop looking at sources you provide, as they are wasting my time. Fram (talk) 13:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fram Strange, the 3rd and most recent source you checked, when I typed “Eitermillen” into google, google stated that found inside the link “ Concernant la réglementation temporaire de la circulation sur la N2 entre Sandweiler et le lieu-dit « Eitermillen » à l'occasion de travaux forestiers.” And yet in the website itself I can’t find it. I apologise I should have double checked before sending it.

But you seem to have ignored the source I mentioned was listed on the List of populated places in Luxembourg article. On page 15 if you press the eye icon on the file you can find it clearly lists it under both Eitermillen and Oetrange-Moulin. And while it does say that it’s not an “official locality” thats because Lieu-dits aren’t incorporated as such because that entails them being census subdivisions. Kréintgeshaff for example isn’t incorporated either, unless you think Kréintgeshaff should be deleted too, either way is this not evidence of Éitermillen being legally recognised? And I actually found more sources but it seems you don’t need to see anymore. N1TH Music (talk) 14:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure "at the Eitermillen" is a translation error. I'd err on the side of keep now. SportingFlyer T·C 19:35, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still doesn't indicate much more than what we know, it's a "lieu-dit": our article on those isn't very good, but basically this is a named farm (or mill in this case), not an actual village. This is the Luxemburgish article on them[4], the translation makes it clear that these aren't really considered villages. Fram (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No - the translation of the Letzebuergish shows a lieu-dit could also have been anything from a house to a former locality, and we potentially have a census listing of 8 people living there which would indeed qualify it, if the source is any good (again this is where a lack of a page number hurts.) SportingFlyer T·C 20:54, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SportingFlyer do you not have access to the preview or something? Because when I view the source I can scroll through the pages of the book at located exactly where it says “Oetrange-Moulin”. The listing is on page 255. N1TH Music (talk) 21:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There it is, thanks! It's a very large document and search didn't work. SportingFlyer T·C 22:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arbian

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

Unnotable neighbourhood in Pakistan. I couldn't find any information about it on the Internet. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 15:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was a redirect to Keamari Town, should that be restored? Though its not mentioned there. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think so. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 23:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to Keamari Town. If there were any information about Arbian it could go in a section of that article, but there is literally no info on eikipedia about this place. It could be that the main motivation for the article's existence is to make Google Maps searches have something to say about it. This article feeds directly into the "Quick Facts" part of Google Maps for Arbian. Davemc0 (talk) 23:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nam Suat

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

Unnotable watercourse in Thailand. It has no sources for 8 years. I could not find anything about it on the Internet. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 15:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 15:07, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Couldn't find anything about the subject with a search other than this article. Fails WP:GNG. Madeleine961 (talk) 15:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Thailand. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not found in the Royal Society's Gazetteer,[5] which is expected to include most geographical features. The river does exist, though, and gives its name to the forest along its basin as ป่าน้ำสวด "Nam Suat Forest" (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL), which is part of Tham Sakoen National Park and Mae Yom National Park. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Found this announcement [6] --Lerdsuwa (talk) 05:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Crockett Town, Virginia

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

I can't find anything for this. Newspapers.com results are for Crockett, Virginia. I've tried searching for Crockett Town and the variants Crocketttown and Crockettown, with only some minor coverage for a Crockettown Road. The gbooks preview for "Land Causes, Accomack County, Virginia 1727-1826" indicates no mentions of this, which is some evidence against the possibility that this is a settlement whose rise and fall predates most digitized coverage. A recent Arcadia Press book about Accomack County only has Crockett as a surname. I'm not seeing any evidence that this passes WP:GNG or WP:GEOLAND, or even anything that could be used to expand this article. Hog Farm _Talk 03:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Virginia. Hog Farm _Talk 03:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: it comes up for me as a snippet in a GBooks search in "Virginia's Eastern Shore: A History of Northampton and Accomack Counties", Volume 2, p. 812: "the present crossover road from Crockett Town area to Mount Nebo". This is the only reference in that book. Those two places seem to represent the west and east ends of the present-day Omega Road, respectively, based on the ~1942 USGS topo map. It's not named on older topo maps, and after beating through a variety of old maps, there's no evidence that it was an actual settlement (nor that the Crocketts lived there). Choess (talk) 06:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Most likely existed when this article was created, but no longer exists. Searching the official Accomack County home page the only Crockett that comes up is Robert D. Crockett on the board of supervisors. — Maile (talk) 14:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete With over 2,000 pages in Category:Unincorporated communities in Virginia, the majority of which like this one machine- or bulk-created 16 years ago with no expansion since, I recommend a bulk deletion of such non-notable places made by this user. I commend Hog Farm for his research that the creator didn't do, but there are hundreds and hundreds like this one, names simply lifted from a map to a database and then lifted to be articles that do not meet our notability standards, if not outright incorrect. Reywas92^Talk 05:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - the editor you refer to is an administrator on Wikipedia: Ser Amantio di Nicolao. They have been around since 2006. This article was created in 2008. The bulk method you are referring to was not just Virginia, and not just this editor. When I first started editing, I found a whole lot of content on another US state via an editor who "authored thousands of articles on U.S. cities and counties using the rambot and other automatic article generation techniques". Ever since, I've made it my goal to edit or otherwise expand such articles when I find them. We are all on a learning curve at Wikipedia. — Maile (talk) 13:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I know the history here and how widespread the issue is, but that doesn't mean we should keep these substubs with a high error rate or have to discuss so many individually. He also bulk-created articles in the Virgin Islands like Madame Carty, U.S. Virgin Islands that are blatantly false ([7][8]). Crockett Town is a real place that is in the GNIS because it was on topo maps like [9] from 1943, but it was never more than a few homes and a map label does not mean it should have an article. Reywas92^Talk 15:36, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hodobana Cave

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

I can't find a reliable source, and the one given is a passing mention, as I have access to this textbook. I would be ok with a redirect, but don't know a target. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 00:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, sources exist, it's just that most are in Romanian (and several of them fall in that gap of "too old to have been published online, too young to be public domain", which doesn't make finding them online any easier):

SIGCOV: in Damm, P.E & Mitrofan, H. (2005). Peştera din Pârâul Hodobanei. Speomond 9 pp.15–19 & the Hodobana listing on speozet.ro, editor Paul Damm. (Both in Romanian)
SIGCOV-but-no-access: Vălenaş L.(1982) Consideration preliminaires sur les problemes crees par la tectonique active de la Peştera din Pîrîul Hodobanei (Monts Bihor). Nymphaea, t.X, 183-194
Possible SIGCOV, but no access to verify: Mitrofan H. (1985) Acomodarea de adio, Bul.CCSS, 9 p.119-130
Possible SIGCOV, but no access to verify: Tulucan, T. (1986). Clasificarea genetică a fenomenelor endo-vulcano-carstice din România. Aspecte ale repartiţiei acestora în lanţul Munţilor Carpaţi. Buletin speologic informativ FRTA-CCSS, nr. 10, p. 121-135
Additionally, sigcov in English by Liviu Vălenaş (WP:SPS, yes, but by an expert--his 1982 publication on this cave (listed above) is listed in practically every source that pays even a passing mention to the Hodobana Cave. Also has various other published articles in subject-relevant journals including Theoretical and Applied Karstology and Speomond, as well as multiple Nymphaea yearbooks.)

AddWittyNameHere 07:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nanticoke City, Delaware

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

Likely insignificant formerly unincorporated residential subdivision that is now a part of Seaford, Delaware. I am unable to locate the article's cited sources anywhere to verify whether it fails WP:SIGCOV or falls under WP:ROUTINE, but based on Google or Newspapers.com yielding no relevant results and the only relevant newspaper coverage that I am able to find being passing mentions, I am almost certain that this place is not notable. Waddles 🗩 🖉 23:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, United States of America, and Delaware. Waddles 🗩 🖉 23:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly was a real "village" – the Delaware General Assembly once appointed commissioners to survey the "village known as Nanticoke City, Seaford Hundred," to consider the construction of a public road there. Passing book mentions here and here. Newspapers.com has ~170 mentions of the community in Delaware papers, e.g. [10] [11]. It seems like it was considered separate from Seaford until it was "annexed" in 1910 ([12]). BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going with merge to Seaford, Delaware#History. The latter is terrible anyway, and given that this area is now part of the town, it makes sense to talk about it as part of Seaford's history. Mangoe (talk) 01:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If every unpopulated but named crossroads or housing development in the county deserves its own article just because it is noted in the GNIS, then certainly an unincorporated town that existed as a separate entity for more than 50 years and was home to a railroad stop, a natural gas plant, river docks, and hundreds of residents before being annexed into another town is notable. Deeds for these properties in Seaford still have them listed on the Sussex County Recorder of Deeds site as Nanticoke City. For example, the property at 120 N Bradford Street in Seaford is listed on the Sussex County Recorder of Deeds as #54 Nanticoke City on both the mortgage and deed in the legal description of the property. I would also add that this article already includes more information than other so called notable communities listed for the county such as Adams Crossroads, Delaware, Blanchard, Delaware, Indian Beach, Delaware, and dozens more from the county and state. Superman7515 (talk) 14:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Superman7515: Per WP:GEOLAND, "Populated places without legal recognition are considered on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the GNG. Examples may include subdivisions, business parks, housing developments, informal regions of a state, unofficial neighborhoods, etc. – any of which could be considered notable on a case-by-case basis, given non-trivial coverage by their name in multiple, independent reliable sources. If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the informal place should be included in the more general article on the legally recognized populated place or administrative subdivision that contains it." Unless Nanticoke City was an incorporated entity, Census-designated place, or had its own ZIP code, it most likely isn't notable on its own as an unincorporated subdivision. I'm not really convinced that local newspapers coverage of a storm that occurred there and deeds are anything beyond routine coverage and sufficient coverage to verify its notability.

It is more than likely that a lot of these mass-created stubs for 'unincorporated communities' should not exist, too. After having been opposed to deleting these sort of articles (I don't doubt I had created some myself some years ago), I have in the past listed some of these sort of articles for deletion, most recently here, here, and here. It is definitely possible that some if not all of those examples of communities you linked should also have their articles deleted, too. Waddles 🗩 🖉 22:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge is a reasonable way out. Bearian (talk) 03:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this was clearly once a populated place from my WP:BEFORE search separate from Seaford - even referred to specifically by the state legislature in 1893. It's eligible for its own page. SportingFlyer T·C 04:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pendleton Hill

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

I can't find evidence of notability as either a populated place (WP:NPLACE) nor a geographic feature (WP:NATFEAT). GNIS only lists it as a summit, not as a populated place. The only information about it as a feature is trivial mentions like the Appletons' Atlas citation. Similarly, while there are plenty of trivial mentions of it (mostly related to the eponymous road and church), it does not appear to ever have been an officially recognized place, nor is there significant coverage about the place itself. The only two sources in the article that actually give any details about the place - "Etymology Nerd" and Lynne Holden - are both self-published and do not count as reliable sources. Redirection to North Stonington, Connecticut would be a reasonable AtD. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:42, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:42, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment According to this article, it was a place people lived at, including the Palmer family discussed in that article. And it's shown as a place people listed as their home location, farmers and otherwise, as far back as 1943 and 1894. Silver seren^C 21:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Banff and Macduff

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

This doesn't appear to be an ambiguous topic so a DAB is not appropriate here anymore than any other term like Tiger and elephant, France and Germany, Facebook and Wikipedia or California and Rhode Island. This is effectively an WP:XY situation where having a DAB is not appropriate. Maybe due to the history needing to be preserved it could be moved to something like Banff, Scotland. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:47, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:47, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment according to the revision history, this was kept because of revision history dating back to 2010 (Special:Permalink/344701511), moving to Banff, Scotland (and converting to a redirect) seems fine. I don't think the content added by GeorgiaHuman justifies an article; if it does, it would just mean this title should redirect to Jamie Macpherson. Walsh90210 (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move: to the Banff article seems fine, there is some importance to the rivalry. I don't think this is notable enough for a full article though. Oaktree b (talk) 00:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and add info re their Community Council, and move the Jamie Macpherson detail to his own article, where the 15 minutes story is currently tagged as {{cn}}. The ambiguity of both Banff and Macduff also adds to the usefulness of having this page for the commonly-used pairing. PamD 06:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added content showing that it is a community council area (AFAIK this is roughly equivalent to an English civil parish), with a council. It is clearly notable, but the content about Macpherson is excessive and should be moved to Jamie Macpherson or just removed. PamD 11:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I've now also removed the long, probably copyright-breaching, quotes, which don't belong in this article. PamD 12:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Banff is a separate civil parish and Macduff is in Gamrie parish thoguh Macduff is/was a burgh. I don't think the is roughly the equivalent of a civil parish with a council I think this is roughly equivalent to a grouped parish council for example "Hopton cum Knettishall Parish Council" covering the separate parishes of Hopton and Knettishall. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It looks OK now. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC) (Macduff is a lovely place, by the way)[reply]
Keep. The article has been substantially expanded since the original nomination (no longer being a disambiguation page) and meets WP:GNG. Plenty of significant coverage in reliable sources over the years. GeorgiaHuman (talk) 19:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manak Nangli

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPLACE. Unable to find any sources via Google or its sub-engines, the only sources are basic geographical databases and a census from 1981, which doesn't seem to constitute presumed notability. Although this doesn't matter nearly as much, the article is an orphan (and FindLink cannot find anything), which questions its notability. I doubt this article has potential in the encyclopedia both now and in the future, and I suggest it's removal. Sparkle & Fade (Talk|contribs) 03:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:04, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I can’t find anything on Google news nor newspapers; book has one hit and one line. A redirect to the district is my remote second option. Bearian (talk) 05:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pyletown, Virginia

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

Another of the place name articles in Virginia that is tagged as unsourced. This is very similar to Claytonville, Virginia (AfD discussion); the two are in the same county. Nothing in the 1914 county history about this place, nor in a recent Arcadia press book about the county. There are zero results on newspapers.com in Virginia for "Pyletown"; searching for the variant "Pyle Town" brings up nothing about this place either.

While this does show up as a place name on the USGS topos, all I can find about this place is that there is a Pyletown road in a rural area several miles outside of Boyce, Virginia. This doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:GEOLAND and isn't really verifiable. Hog Farm _Talk 01:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Virginia. Hog Farm _Talk 01:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Just a non-notable locality. Waddles 🗩 🖉 06:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nomination. Non-notable locale. TH1980 (talk) 02:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ahbou, British Columbia

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

An unnotable ghost town in British Columbia. The sources in this article are broken. I was unable to find anything about it online. There is currently no evidence of it existing, and even if it does exist, it is not notable enough to be on Wikipedia. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 18:16, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 18:16, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The article description doesn't make any sense. This is Lodi lake - there is no Ahbou lake near it. There is an Ahbau lake about 7km south of it, but not "the other side of a road". There is also no sign of any settlement near Lodi Lake. Unless there's some explanation (am I looking in the wrong place?) I'm leaning delete on this. FOARP (talk) 20:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:V in addition to WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND. The cited location is too vague to verify, and I can't find any other information besides the cited source. BTW, the citation is mangled; this appears to be the book cited, and it seems to be self-published. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, per this, Basque Garnet ran Sunfire Publications. FOARP (talk) 04:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is an Ahbau Creek, Lake and Station, but no record of an Ahbou settlement. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ozenic, Virginia

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

Tagged as unsourced since 2022; there's a GNIS external link but this place name has apparently been purged from GNIS. This isn't an "unincorporated community", this was a village of the Powhatan confederacy, situated in 1608 on Chickahominy r. in New Kent co., Va. per this. This states that it was the closest out of a set of villages to the James River.

I can find nothing that provides further details. While I am sympathetic to the notability of extinct native settlements, the sum source of knowledge of this source is that somebody wrote in 1608 that this place existed. This would be WP:UNDUE weight to mention at the Powhatan article. Any further sourcing would be from 400+ years ago in an extinct language and almost certainly no longer exists. There's just nothing to say about this place other than that it existed in 1608, and I don't think that's sufficient basis for an article. Hog Farm _Talk 02:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Virginia. Hog Farm _Talk 02:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No information found anywhere other than the sources given by nom, and no information to merge. Unlikely search term. Anyway, the artice was created as an informationless GNIS-dump, not as an attempt to document Powhatan settlements, and is flatly incorrect in calling this an "unincorporated community", so I'm comfortable with a delete. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:00, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per all of the above. This is certainly not a currently existing community, nor is there any notability rationale presented in the article. TH1980 (talk) 02:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete With over 2,000 pages in Category:Unincorporated communities in Virginia, the majority of which like this one machine- or bulk-created 16 years ago with no expansion since, I recommend a bulk deletion of such non-notable places made by this user. I commend Hog Farm for his research that the creator didn't do, but there are hundreds and hundreds like this one, names simply lifted from a map to a database and then lifted to be articles that do not meet our notability standards, if not outright incorrect. Reywas92^Talk 05:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Claytonville, Virginia

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

Unsourced since creation in 2006. This is on the USGS topos and surely exists, but I can't find any coverage that would indicate a WP:GEOLAND or WP:GNG pass. No mentions in a 1914 county history, nor in a 2011 History Press book about the county. Another recent county history contains one reference to "Clayton's Store", but no Claytonville. Newspapers.com has Claytonville Farm as a historic home/garden open for tour, but the other results in VA papers are for sites elsewhere and a description of the plot of a high school play put on in the late 1930s. I'm not seeing anything that would provide the basis for an article on this subject. Hog Farm _Talk 01:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Virginia. Hog Farm _Talk 01:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: USGS topo maps show a church and cemetery at the site, plus several buildings, at least as far back as 1938: [13]. This would normally be enough to suggest sources exist, but I can't find any, apart from a single appearance on a map in an Arcadia Publishing book. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:07, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I couldn't find anything substantial that would grant this community a notable status beyond a local one. TH1980 (talk) 02:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete With over 2,000 pages in Category:Unincorporated communities in Virginia, the majority of which like this one machine- or bulk-created 16 years ago with no expansion since, I recommend a bulk deletion of such non-notable places made by this user. I commend Hog Farm for his research that the creator didn't do, but there are hundreds and hundreds like this one, names simply lifted from a map to a database and then lifted to be articles that do not meet our notability standards, if not outright incorrect. Reywas92^Talk 05:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. —Ganesha811 (talk) 18:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prospect Hill, Tacoma, Washington

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

Completely unreferenced page. I couldn't find anything on this "neighborhood" on Google Books or from local news sources. If there is no consensus to delete, redirect to North Tacoma, Tacoma, Washington. Novemberjazz 16:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom leaning a slight merge If not notable, it might as well be redirected to north tacoma and maybe have a small amount of merge of content. Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 17:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:GEOLAND. Don't really see what could be merged considering the article has no sources and is so small content wise. Beachweak (talk) 21:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete I couldn't verify any of the claims of the article other than that it is a neighborhood in Tacoma. I couldn't even verify that it's in North Tacoma. Other than real estate hits I got one reference of it being next to another area, but literally nothing that talked about itself. The whole thing also has a strong promotional feel as well. I looked at other Tacoma neighborhood articles, and many of them were similarly problematic at first glance. Mangoe (talk) 21:40, 4 December 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.

Bushrod, Indiana

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

This is another "what did the WPA text say?" case, as Baker cites it for a founding date in spite of ample evidence that this is in fact another rail spot. What older topos and aerials show is that this was once the east end of a small yard; I found one person cited as yardmaster there. And all the relevant hits indicate this, with lots of irrelevant surname hits. There's no town here now and now place of it to have been, as the topos show nothing but trackwork and a couple of buildings. Mangoe (talk) 17:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. – The Grid (talk) 18:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was able to find a news article from 1959 that refers to it as a "town": [14], but it's more about the man it's named for than the place itself. A 1946 article in the Linton Daily Citizen has a little more information, but just describes it as a rail point and not a town: [15]. Undecided about whether this counts as WP:SIGCOV. As much as I hate geographic permastubs like this one, we have a little bit more (albeit conflicting) information than is typical for these "GNIS gives this name to this point" type articles. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 22:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can see from a 1958 aerial that there was no town there; except for the Quonset hut (which might have been a different building at the same spot) there's just a structure withing the wye of the tracks. Mangoe (talk) 00:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beehunter, Indiana

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

This is plainly a rail point, formerly a crossover/junction and more recently a rather odd pair of junctions. The only road in the area actually swerves to avoid the spot, and the only building is in the middle of the junction; I would gather it was once the "tower" but it's impossible to tell. I did find some explicit reference to it as a rail station/junction but other references are to the marsh or to a potential archaeological site, or to local mining activity, npne of which are not in this immediate vicinity. Mangoe (talk) 16:29, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 16:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Suprisingly detailed article from 1970 talks about the history of this rail spot: [16], but states clearly that it "was never a city, nor a town, nor was it ever the home of more than one family." I will update the article accordingly. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 22:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you find a free pdf or transcript of this paper, since sources are always better when they're accessible. FLIPPINGOUT (talk) 22:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Try this: [17]. It continues on a second page, but this proves my point. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. One article isn't sufficient to elevate a rail point to notability. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:08, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — I’m not sure I agree with nominator’s reasoning, as it seems to be skirting the edges of WP:OR territory. That said, I am also struggling to see how a single article from 1970 qualifies the junction for notability, particularly after glancing at the criteria set-forth by WP:NTRAINSTATION. MWFwiki (talk) 06:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of basic settlement units in Brno

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

This recently created list fails WP:NOTDIRECTORY. It is an extremely detailed breakdown for specific purposes in a professional sphere, which goes beyond the scope of an encyclopedia. Other European metropolises do not have a list with such a breakdown (so Brno is very random in this context). Similar lists are not found on cswiki either. FromCzech (talk) 12:32, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Lists, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 12:32, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest that's quite fair. I simply wanted to make a ranking of the basic settlement units by density and population since that's what I'm usually interested in, but if others agree for the deletion I am for it too. GreenWolfyVillager (talk) 13:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

comment I have to say this is largely incomprehensible without a map. Mangoe (talk) 13:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is already the article Administrative divisions of Brno would it simply be way better to move the article there? GreenWolfyVillager (talk) 17:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This does not solve the concerns I raised above. It doesn't matter if the list is stand-alone or not. FromCzech (talk) 06:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Orientls (talk) 07:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lists are usually by county, state or country, so this could be made into a list of places (or statistical or administrative units) in the South Moravian Region or there could be separate pages for each district, including Brno-City District. Peter James (talk) 13:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pazhassi's Cave

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

A less referenced version already exists in draftspace. A WP:BEFORE search turned up little. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 18:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Tamil Nadu. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 18:33, 29 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!} 22:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz Geez, the participation level is zero. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 07:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – does not appear to be notable. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Snou Strait

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

No refs on the page for many years. Many other language wikis have pages but I'm not seeing usable reliable sources to cite. I'm not finding much else, but I don't speak any of the relevant languages, I would be interested to see if anyone can find anything which would meet the GNG JMWt (talk) 11:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, Japan, and Russia. JMWt (talk) 11:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
cpmment I would say merge to Chyornye Bratya except that the one source I saw of any merit (the second listed in the Russian article) doesn't support the claims made. But whatever we say about this strait clearly belongs in that article. Mangoe (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this name doesn't seem to be used in English literature, so I'm actually thinking delete. Mangoe (talk) 00:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few more citations in the Russian article about Henry James Snow, ru:Сноу, Генри Джеймс. It cites https://webcitation.org/6ELOwHZxN?url=http://www.kurilsk-adm.ru/index.php?option=com_content#mon3#mon3 for the claim that the strait and volcano are named after him. The Japanese page about the islands, ja:知理保以島, seems to have the same place as Rakku Strait (猟虎水道, rakku suidō, 'sea otter waterway/channel/strait'), with a broken citation link. I would: 1. spell it as Snow; 2. rather than using the name unqualified, say something like "known in Russian as the 'Snow Strait' (Russian: пролив Сноу, romanized: proliv Snou)"; 3. make this a redirect (or I guess you say a merge but there's not much of a difference). Adumbrativus (talk) 09:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 02:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 keep‎. Owen× ☎ 21:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Straight Point

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

No refs on the page for many years. Seems to be used as a point of geographical reference for the Aylesbeare Mudstone Group geological formation, with passing mentions in the scientific literature. But to me, the existence of a headland is not notable and mentions of a named point on a map in the scientific literature isn't enough to meet the notability criteria either. JMWt (talk) 17:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. JMWt (talk) 17:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep: There are several articles for places along the Jurassic Coast that are similarly short in length, and perhaps similarly deficient in citations. I'm not keen on treating any one article (e.g. this "Straight Point") in isolation from the others; instead I would rather consider a course of action common to all the Jurassic Coast articles (see the J.C. template at the end of the article). I would certainly look favourably on a proposal to stubify those are deficient in the way you identify, and I would volunteer:

to do the work of stubification
try to find a cite or two for those that might need it (dusting off my now rather rusty geology degree).

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Feline Hymnic (talk • contribs) 18:27, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Hello friend, thanks for engaging. I appreciate your offer to improve the page, if you could supply some sources that show the notability of this feature, that would be very helpful to the discussion. Please see WP:ATA if you are unfamiliar with the AfD process. JMWt (talk) 18:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep: Yes indeed that is very true, there are a number of articles about places along the Jurassic Coast that are very much as short in length, and, indeed, they are similarly deficient in citations. I also thank you for your suggestion and I sincerlely hope that you will keep to your proposal and expand the article. This because I find your offer to improve the page as a much better solution than a deletion. I wish you good fortune with your new project. Greetings --Huligan0 (talk) 21:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, or Draftify for Feline Hymnic to work on. I'm failing to find anything on this point which suggests it passes WP:GEONATURAL. We don't keep articles because other similarly deficient articles also exist (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS), and looking at List of places on the Jurassic Coast wouldn't suggest we're dealing with a complete set anyway (not that it would matter if we were) Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 10:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEONATURAL - clearly discussed in Geology of the Jurassic Coast and West Country Cruising Companion along with a geology book from the 1910s along with other sources, already a start-class article (references have been WP:HEYed, and GEONATURAL is a very permissive notability guideline. Absolutely no reason to delete this. SportingFlyer T·C 01:03, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, none of the added sources are significant coverage. I agree that the headland is used as a waypoint in various publications, that doesn't make it notable. JMWt (talk) 08:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I completely disagree with you on that - there's more than enough information out there to have this have a stand-alone article. SportingFlyer T·C 07:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 19:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; notable. Per WP:GEONATURAL it is notable since there is significant information in the article. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 19:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:GEONATURAL notability test as there is more content than a map reference and coordinates. However, there is a case for discussing a merging of Otter Cove into this article or vv. Rupples (talk) 02:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features) DocZach (talk) 06:47, 11 December 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.

Geography-related proposed deletions