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 is a "Pleasure Valley Road" at these
coordinates but a dozen houses on a private street is not a notable place. No substantive sources, search results are auto-generated.
Reywas92Talk19:34, 12 May 2019 (UTC)reply
I am from Indiana - my vendetta is against mass-produced sub-stubs without actual sources. "Presumed notability" means that substantive sources are expected to be available, but none are to be found here so notability is not actually established. Where is the evidence that this "subdivision or housing development" has non-trivial coverage by reliable sources? GEOLAND says "This guideline specifically excludes maps and census tables from consideration when establishing topic notability". Where are the substantive sources still required under "On the other hand, sources that describe the subject instead of simply mentioning it do establish notability."? Reywas92Talk 18:03, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
The difference is it's recognized by a legally constituted body of a sovereign state, demonstrable through RS, which is the only requirement of GEOLAND.
Chetsford (
talk)
21:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - the guidelines say nothing about a "minimal threshold" - if there is a "minimal threshold required per community consensus" then the guidelines need to be updated to reflect this consensus, but as it stands we must follow the guidelines as written -
WP:NGEO says that "geographical features meeting Wikipedia's General notability guideline (GNG) are presumed, but not guaranteed, to be notable" - meeting GNG means having "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" - this place lacks significant coverage (mentioned in a list or appearing on a map is a passing reference, not significant coverage) -
WP:GEOLAND says that places without legal recognition (like this unincorporated community) can be considered notable "given non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources" - WP:GEOLAND also says that places may be notable "because notability encompasses their entire history", but this place has no notable history - just existing does not establish notability - the article does not meet
WP:GNG, therefore delete - also, "Two sentences does not an encyclopedic article make," and "All articles that are only one or two sentences long should be either expanded or deleted." per
WP:2S -
Epinoia (
talk)
16:15, 17 May 2019 (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 is a "Pleasure Valley Road" at these
coordinates but a dozen houses on a private street is not a notable place. No substantive sources, search results are auto-generated.
Reywas92Talk19:34, 12 May 2019 (UTC)reply
I am from Indiana - my vendetta is against mass-produced sub-stubs without actual sources. "Presumed notability" means that substantive sources are expected to be available, but none are to be found here so notability is not actually established. Where is the evidence that this "subdivision or housing development" has non-trivial coverage by reliable sources? GEOLAND says "This guideline specifically excludes maps and census tables from consideration when establishing topic notability". Where are the substantive sources still required under "On the other hand, sources that describe the subject instead of simply mentioning it do establish notability."? Reywas92Talk 18:03, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
The difference is it's recognized by a legally constituted body of a sovereign state, demonstrable through RS, which is the only requirement of GEOLAND.
Chetsford (
talk)
21:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete - the guidelines say nothing about a "minimal threshold" - if there is a "minimal threshold required per community consensus" then the guidelines need to be updated to reflect this consensus, but as it stands we must follow the guidelines as written -
WP:NGEO says that "geographical features meeting Wikipedia's General notability guideline (GNG) are presumed, but not guaranteed, to be notable" - meeting GNG means having "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" - this place lacks significant coverage (mentioned in a list or appearing on a map is a passing reference, not significant coverage) -
WP:GEOLAND says that places without legal recognition (like this unincorporated community) can be considered notable "given non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources" - WP:GEOLAND also says that places may be notable "because notability encompasses their entire history", but this place has no notable history - just existing does not establish notability - the article does not meet
WP:GNG, therefore delete - also, "Two sentences does not an encyclopedic article make," and "All articles that are only one or two sentences long should be either expanded or deleted." per
WP:2S -
Epinoia (
talk)
16:15, 17 May 2019 (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.