The result was delete. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
The article is almost accurate. but Binney Junction is not "an unincorporated community [...] at the junction of the Western Pacific and Southern Pacific Railroads"; it is the junction itself, which has, as far back as I can trace, always sat right at the edge of Maryville. There has never been a separate community around it. As far as the junction itself is concerned, it gets exactly the usual hits for a spot on the rail, so unless someone else can find something, I have to say that it isn't a notable junction.
This case is so obviously wrong (in the sense that anyone looking at a map or an aerial can see that there's no community here) that I went at looked at the USGS list of "feature class definitions", where I discovered a major omission: they have no class specifically for points on a railroad. It looks as though the list was compiled without awareness that every passing siding has a name, no matter how isolated it has; and indeed every place where two through tracks meet has a name, even just the ends of a passing siding. Therefore all these junctions and sidings get listed as "populated places", regardless of whether there was ever any surrounding population. I had figured that these spots were merely isolated errors; I had not guessed that there was a systematic fault in their system. At any rate, these rail points should never have been described in WP as "unincorporated communities". Mangoe ( talk) 15:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
The result was delete. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
The article is almost accurate. but Binney Junction is not "an unincorporated community [...] at the junction of the Western Pacific and Southern Pacific Railroads"; it is the junction itself, which has, as far back as I can trace, always sat right at the edge of Maryville. There has never been a separate community around it. As far as the junction itself is concerned, it gets exactly the usual hits for a spot on the rail, so unless someone else can find something, I have to say that it isn't a notable junction.
This case is so obviously wrong (in the sense that anyone looking at a map or an aerial can see that there's no community here) that I went at looked at the USGS list of "feature class definitions", where I discovered a major omission: they have no class specifically for points on a railroad. It looks as though the list was compiled without awareness that every passing siding has a name, no matter how isolated it has; and indeed every place where two through tracks meet has a name, even just the ends of a passing siding. Therefore all these junctions and sidings get listed as "populated places", regardless of whether there was ever any surrounding population. I had figured that these spots were merely isolated errors; I had not guessed that there was a systematic fault in their system. At any rate, these rail points should never have been described in WP as "unincorporated communities". Mangoe ( talk) 15:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC)