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.
This article contains of a chunk of unsourced "classifications" and then lists what appears to be a very arbitrary collection of sites, including two sparsely but indisputably inhabited towns, and a dilapidated amusement park. One single reference and that for a place that does not appear to be a ghost town. I'm seeing a lot of WP:OR and next to nothing to back up inclusion of entries. At present, there's no basis for an article. -- Elmidae (
talk ·
contribs)
16:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete the criteria listed are unsourced
original research, and don't seem to match up with the usual definition of a ghost town. None of the places listed is described as a ghost town or abandoned settlement in its article, several are either not described as settlements at all or are described as still inhabited. Nor are there any sources describing the entries as ghost towns. Hut 8.518:24, 2 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete: None of the items on the list are ghost towns. In fact one is annexing surrounding areas, "On 1 January 2023, St. Martins annexed all or part of three local service districts to form the new village of Fundy-St. Martins". The criteria itself contradicts what a ghost town is, the remaining is OR. A list with no criteria and no entries is no article. //
Timothy ::
talk08:02, 7 March 2023 (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.
This article contains of a chunk of unsourced "classifications" and then lists what appears to be a very arbitrary collection of sites, including two sparsely but indisputably inhabited towns, and a dilapidated amusement park. One single reference and that for a place that does not appear to be a ghost town. I'm seeing a lot of WP:OR and next to nothing to back up inclusion of entries. At present, there's no basis for an article. -- Elmidae (
talk ·
contribs)
16:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete the criteria listed are unsourced
original research, and don't seem to match up with the usual definition of a ghost town. None of the places listed is described as a ghost town or abandoned settlement in its article, several are either not described as settlements at all or are described as still inhabited. Nor are there any sources describing the entries as ghost towns. Hut 8.518:24, 2 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete: None of the items on the list are ghost towns. In fact one is annexing surrounding areas, "On 1 January 2023, St. Martins annexed all or part of three local service districts to form the new village of Fundy-St. Martins". The criteria itself contradicts what a ghost town is, the remaining is OR. A list with no criteria and no entries is no article. //
Timothy ::
talk08:02, 7 March 2023 (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.