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.
Keep/Merge Encyclopedic content worth preserving; as Antarctica lacks the extensive and dominant human-made infrastructure that other world regions possess, one might presume that if an Antarctic nature feature is notable enough to get named then it is notable enough to appear in Wikipedia.
Apcbg (
talk)
12:03, 14 June 2021 (UTC)reply
What the heck does "notable enough to get named" mean? "It has a name" is NOT our standard of notability (
WP:GEOLAND), no matter where in the world it is. The GNIS actually only gives its location imprecisely as
-63.583333, -59, which is empty ocean, so we don't even know which of these scores of tiny, nondescript rocks they are! Nor is it necessarily worth mentioning a tiny, nondescript rock on some other article merely because it exists.
Reywas92Talk18:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep This feature seems to just pass
WP:GEOLAND as it has been referred to in multiple published geological references
[1][2][3], and has information beyond just "statistics and a name" (the sources include the name origin).
Qwaiiplayer (
talk)
13:42, 17 June 2021 (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.
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.
Keep/Merge Encyclopedic content worth preserving; as Antarctica lacks the extensive and dominant human-made infrastructure that other world regions possess, one might presume that if an Antarctic nature feature is notable enough to get named then it is notable enough to appear in Wikipedia.
Apcbg (
talk)
12:03, 14 June 2021 (UTC)reply
What the heck does "notable enough to get named" mean? "It has a name" is NOT our standard of notability (
WP:GEOLAND), no matter where in the world it is. The GNIS actually only gives its location imprecisely as
-63.583333, -59, which is empty ocean, so we don't even know which of these scores of tiny, nondescript rocks they are! Nor is it necessarily worth mentioning a tiny, nondescript rock on some other article merely because it exists.
Reywas92Talk18:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep This feature seems to just pass
WP:GEOLAND as it has been referred to in multiple published geological references
[1][2][3], and has information beyond just "statistics and a name" (the sources include the name origin).
Qwaiiplayer (
talk)
13:42, 17 June 2021 (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.