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.
There was pretty clearly a railroad station here: the foundations of three trackside buildings are still visible, and Street View also shows a water tank. These buildings also show up on topos, and that's about it: there is nothing else around except the inevitable parallel road and a strip of farmland a bit to the south, along the river. Searching is next to hopeless due to the multiplicity of false hits but I got nothing but clickbait.
Mangoe (
talk)
04:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep Its current status and inconvenient name are not reasons to delete. With an estimated population of 25 in 1933 (
[1]), it was described as a
growing community in 1941, two years later it become the site of
Camp Horn, Arizona, and rightly or wrongly it still appears on maps (
[2]) and descriptions (
[3]) as a location. If enough isn't found for a separate article it should be merged with
Camp Horn, Arizona.----
Pontificalibus07:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Not really, it says "Other [non-heavy] stations are usually kept or merged and redirected to an article about the line or system they are on. If there was sig coverage about a station here, it could have an article. If there was anything to merge into the article on the Union Pacific in Arizona, it could be merged. If it was mentioned in some article, it could be redirected. Otherwise, it's a delete from a rail perspective.
MB15:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Camp Horn. No evidence of any kind of organized community here. Some people may have lived on farms in the area, leading to a mention or two that it was a community - because using the name of the closest named rail siding was convenient way to indicate the area.
MB15:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Redirect per above.
WP:GEOLAND gives near-automatic notability to legally recognised populated places. I don't see any evidence that this place is or was legally recognised, even if it's mentioned as somewhere people lived. If it's an unrecognised populated place, or something else like a station, then it has to pass the
WP:GNG. The passing mentions linked are not nearly sufficient for this. Hut 8.511:35, 6 December 2020 (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.
There was pretty clearly a railroad station here: the foundations of three trackside buildings are still visible, and Street View also shows a water tank. These buildings also show up on topos, and that's about it: there is nothing else around except the inevitable parallel road and a strip of farmland a bit to the south, along the river. Searching is next to hopeless due to the multiplicity of false hits but I got nothing but clickbait.
Mangoe (
talk)
04:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep Its current status and inconvenient name are not reasons to delete. With an estimated population of 25 in 1933 (
[1]), it was described as a
growing community in 1941, two years later it become the site of
Camp Horn, Arizona, and rightly or wrongly it still appears on maps (
[2]) and descriptions (
[3]) as a location. If enough isn't found for a separate article it should be merged with
Camp Horn, Arizona.----
Pontificalibus07:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Not really, it says "Other [non-heavy] stations are usually kept or merged and redirected to an article about the line or system they are on. If there was sig coverage about a station here, it could have an article. If there was anything to merge into the article on the Union Pacific in Arizona, it could be merged. If it was mentioned in some article, it could be redirected. Otherwise, it's a delete from a rail perspective.
MB15:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Camp Horn. No evidence of any kind of organized community here. Some people may have lived on farms in the area, leading to a mention or two that it was a community - because using the name of the closest named rail siding was convenient way to indicate the area.
MB15:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Redirect per above.
WP:GEOLAND gives near-automatic notability to legally recognised populated places. I don't see any evidence that this place is or was legally recognised, even if it's mentioned as somewhere people lived. If it's an unrecognised populated place, or something else like a station, then it has to pass the
WP:GNG. The passing mentions linked are not nearly sufficient for this. Hut 8.511:35, 6 December 2020 (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.