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.
Don't know what the sole source (Durham) says here, but it doesn't seem notable. This place does not appear on topos. No GNIS entry, not in Gudde.
This calls it a railroad switch. No evidence that
WP:GEOLAND is met.
Hog FarmTalk16:09, 26 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment. Using "Gimbal, California", a Google Scholar search yielded; "Your search - "Gimbal, California" - did not match any articles." The same result occurred for "Gimbal California". Using the same search terms in JSTOR yielded "No results found". Otherwise, there seems to be at least handfull of persons with the surname Gimbel to be found in California. I did not find anything of any significance about a settlement called "Gimbal" in California.
Paul H. (
talk)
02:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete - For exactly the same reasons as all of the other thousands of GNIS/Durham-sourced stubs created by Carlos in 2009 which has to be the worst case of editor-negligence that I've ever seen and which we are ~6 months into clearing up with no end in sight (sigh). He literally spent maybe a couple-three minutes making each article back in 2009, even assuming good faith he was transparently just doing this so he could compete for the top spot on
this list. As a result, here in 2021, 12 year later, we have to spend a week or more discussing each one at AFD to get them deleted if the PROD is declined. Fails
WP:GEOLAND, mischaracterises Durham. EDIT: sorry to sound off about this but it really gets my goat when I see that I spent 2-3 times as long PRODing an article than the creator did creating it.
FOARP (
talk)
13:35, 2 February 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.
Don't know what the sole source (Durham) says here, but it doesn't seem notable. This place does not appear on topos. No GNIS entry, not in Gudde.
This calls it a railroad switch. No evidence that
WP:GEOLAND is met.
Hog FarmTalk16:09, 26 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment. Using "Gimbal, California", a Google Scholar search yielded; "Your search - "Gimbal, California" - did not match any articles." The same result occurred for "Gimbal California". Using the same search terms in JSTOR yielded "No results found". Otherwise, there seems to be at least handfull of persons with the surname Gimbel to be found in California. I did not find anything of any significance about a settlement called "Gimbal" in California.
Paul H. (
talk)
02:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete - For exactly the same reasons as all of the other thousands of GNIS/Durham-sourced stubs created by Carlos in 2009 which has to be the worst case of editor-negligence that I've ever seen and which we are ~6 months into clearing up with no end in sight (sigh). He literally spent maybe a couple-three minutes making each article back in 2009, even assuming good faith he was transparently just doing this so he could compete for the top spot on
this list. As a result, here in 2021, 12 year later, we have to spend a week or more discussing each one at AFD to get them deleted if the PROD is declined. Fails
WP:GEOLAND, mischaracterises Durham. EDIT: sorry to sound off about this but it really gets my goat when I see that I spent 2-3 times as long PRODing an article than the creator did creating it.
FOARP (
talk)
13:35, 2 February 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.