- 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.
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:36, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Opportunity Farms, Missouri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While I can find nothing stating that this is a real community, the early topos show a church camp on the site. The association with the church camp is made clearer by [1]. See also this from the organization that runs it and possibly a nearby camp. As a church camp, it has to pass WP:GNG, which it doesn't seem to. Hog Farm Bacon 20:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 20:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 20:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Does not pass WP:GEOLAND as a populated, legally recognized place. Does not have sourcing to pass WP:N. Appears to have possibly been a farm/camp of no notability. Wm335td ( talk) 20:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Newspaper results are about the Mission above and this unrelated ad. No evidence of being a community, and a name on a highway map should not be sufficient to mass-produce such junk. Reywas92 Talk 21:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Merge into county entry per my post on Sagrada: there's no reason why a suitably-motivated person wouldn't be capable of finding out more about the place, the GNIS entry and historical records pretty reliably establish that the place does/did exist, obviously not a hoax or contentious in any way -- nobody's going to get misled by this article existing whether it's an article unto itself or a subsection of another page. jp× g 05:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: I think it would probably have been better to BUNDLE these nominations, since they all proceed from the same general premises, and arguments that are valid for one will be valid similarly for the others. jp× g 05:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- This is wrong, please see WP:GNIS for just a few of the many, many examples where the GNIS inaccurately labeled something as "populated place". A populated place is still not automatically a notable community either. There is nothing worth mentioning in the county article about this; what is misleading is undue weight about a generic farm or church camp. Reywas92 Talk 22:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Nonnotable camp. ~ EDDY ( talk/ contribs)~ 00:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- delete I found the web page for the site itself, which makes it clear it is somewhere between a homeless shelter and retreat house. I'm not convinced that there is enough non-local coverage of the parent organization to justify an article on it, but it's clear that this single facility doesn't make the grade: the first page of hits for it are all on the organization website. Mangoe ( talk) 18:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- delete, A local place without significant coverage does not meet notability. Alex-h ( talk) 09:52, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- 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.
The result was delete. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 22:36, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Opportunity Farms, Missouri ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
While I can find nothing stating that this is a real community, the early topos show a church camp on the site. The association with the church camp is made clearer by [1]. See also this from the organization that runs it and possibly a nearby camp. As a church camp, it has to pass WP:GNG, which it doesn't seem to. Hog Farm Bacon 20:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 20:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 20:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Does not pass WP:GEOLAND as a populated, legally recognized place. Does not have sourcing to pass WP:N. Appears to have possibly been a farm/camp of no notability. Wm335td ( talk) 20:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Newspaper results are about the Mission above and this unrelated ad. No evidence of being a community, and a name on a highway map should not be sufficient to mass-produce such junk. Reywas92 Talk 21:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- Merge into county entry per my post on Sagrada: there's no reason why a suitably-motivated person wouldn't be capable of finding out more about the place, the GNIS entry and historical records pretty reliably establish that the place does/did exist, obviously not a hoax or contentious in any way -- nobody's going to get misled by this article existing whether it's an article unto itself or a subsection of another page. jp× g 05:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: I think it would probably have been better to BUNDLE these nominations, since they all proceed from the same general premises, and arguments that are valid for one will be valid similarly for the others. jp× g 05:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- This is wrong, please see WP:GNIS for just a few of the many, many examples where the GNIS inaccurately labeled something as "populated place". A populated place is still not automatically a notable community either. There is nothing worth mentioning in the county article about this; what is misleading is undue weight about a generic farm or church camp. Reywas92 Talk 22:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Nonnotable camp. ~ EDDY ( talk/ contribs)~ 00:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- delete I found the web page for the site itself, which makes it clear it is somewhere between a homeless shelter and retreat house. I'm not convinced that there is enough non-local coverage of the parent organization to justify an article on it, but it's clear that this single facility doesn't make the grade: the first page of hits for it are all on the organization website. Mangoe ( talk) 18:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- delete, A local place without significant coverage does not meet notability. Alex-h ( talk) 09:52, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- 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.