- 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 keep. Consensus was keep Reasons were passes GNG by being a real place. (non-admin closure) `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 13:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Sacate Village, Arizona
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sacate Village, Arizona ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Here we have the inverse problem of Sacate, Arizona. First, I must boldly say that a CDP isn't notable simply by existing; it has to correspond to some actual settlement, and this one plainly does not. I do not have an actual map of the CDP, but the coordinates given correspond to exactly nothing, just a more or less blank area that has some slight population. And indeed, the GNIS entry comes directly from the census; the topos show nothing.
Contrary wise, there are enough text references to such a place that I have to think there was at some time a Sacate or Secate Village— but not here. Mangoe ( talk) 05:44, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion
- Comment: Discussion here of an archeological site. Not deep enough into this yet to be sure it is at the same location exactly, but it seems to be in the right region. Several mentions here also, although it seems "sacate" means "dry grass" so not all of the hits are relevant. Some are though. It appears on a map in that book, which may be helpful in determining if this is the same place. Still not sure if there's enough for a separate article. Mentioned here also Elinruby ( talk) 07:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC) ASU dissertation here. Mention in passing as a train stop here.
- A citation: Structure, Historic Piman Site. "the Evolution of the Sacate Site (GR-909), Gila River Indian Community." Symposium entitled “Visible Archaeology on the Gila River Indian Reservation,” 67th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Denver. Sacaton, AZ: Cultural Resource Management Program, Gila River Indian Community. 2002.
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 07:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, if it exists, keep it, but it does not seem to have source stating clear existence. Thus, delete. — Moops ⋠ T⋡ 20:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, a CDP is very much notable simply by existing, and the Census Bureau is as clear a source as it gets. Alternatively, rename it primarily to whatever the locals call it as that often differs from the CDP, but it clearly exists. DemocraticLuntz ( talk) 12:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It is a populated place recognized as such by the Census Bureau. Clear GEOLAND pass. Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 22:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment -- Google Search turns up a lot of false positives so I haven't tried too hard to determine if this is or is not a populated place, but doesn't an archeological site with multiple journal articles make that discussion irrelevant, since it would be notable anyway? Elinruby ( talk) 17:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep it's a subdivision of Gila River Indian Community, a Pima-Maricopa Indian reservation. "District 5 is roughly 99 square miles and is known as Casa Blanca or by the O’otham people of the village as Vah ki which translate into English as “House that goes into the ground”. The District is comprised of six village areas: Sweet Water, Bapchule, South Casa Blanca, West Casa Blanca, Sacate and Wet Camp...District 5 was historically the center of the Pima villages and has long been and continues to be the center of the agricultural production of the Pima and Maricopa tribes. " https://www.gilariver.org/index.php/districts/district-5-casa-blanca jengod ( talk) 23:11, 4 January 2023 (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 keep. Consensus was keep Reasons were passes GNG by being a real place. (non-admin closure) `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 13:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Sacate Village, Arizona
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sacate Village, Arizona ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Here we have the inverse problem of Sacate, Arizona. First, I must boldly say that a CDP isn't notable simply by existing; it has to correspond to some actual settlement, and this one plainly does not. I do not have an actual map of the CDP, but the coordinates given correspond to exactly nothing, just a more or less blank area that has some slight population. And indeed, the GNIS entry comes directly from the census; the topos show nothing.
Contrary wise, there are enough text references to such a place that I have to think there was at some time a Sacate or Secate Village— but not here. Mangoe ( talk) 05:44, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion
- Comment: Discussion here of an archeological site. Not deep enough into this yet to be sure it is at the same location exactly, but it seems to be in the right region. Several mentions here also, although it seems "sacate" means "dry grass" so not all of the hits are relevant. Some are though. It appears on a map in that book, which may be helpful in determining if this is the same place. Still not sure if there's enough for a separate article. Mentioned here also Elinruby ( talk) 07:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC) ASU dissertation here. Mention in passing as a train stop here.
- A citation: Structure, Historic Piman Site. "the Evolution of the Sacate Site (GR-909), Gila River Indian Community." Symposium entitled “Visible Archaeology on the Gila River Indian Reservation,” 67th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Denver. Sacaton, AZ: Cultural Resource Management Program, Gila River Indian Community. 2002.
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. AllyD ( talk) 07:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, if it exists, keep it, but it does not seem to have source stating clear existence. Thus, delete. — Moops ⋠ T⋡ 20:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, a CDP is very much notable simply by existing, and the Census Bureau is as clear a source as it gets. Alternatively, rename it primarily to whatever the locals call it as that often differs from the CDP, but it clearly exists. DemocraticLuntz ( talk) 12:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It is a populated place recognized as such by the Census Bureau. Clear GEOLAND pass. Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 22:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment -- Google Search turns up a lot of false positives so I haven't tried too hard to determine if this is or is not a populated place, but doesn't an archeological site with multiple journal articles make that discussion irrelevant, since it would be notable anyway? Elinruby ( talk) 17:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep it's a subdivision of Gila River Indian Community, a Pima-Maricopa Indian reservation. "District 5 is roughly 99 square miles and is known as Casa Blanca or by the O’otham people of the village as Vah ki which translate into English as “House that goes into the ground”. The District is comprised of six village areas: Sweet Water, Bapchule, South Casa Blanca, West Casa Blanca, Sacate and Wet Camp...District 5 was historically the center of the Pima villages and has long been and continues to be the center of the agricultural production of the Pima and Maricopa tribes. " https://www.gilariver.org/index.php/districts/district-5-casa-blanca jengod ( talk) 23:11, 4 January 2023 (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.