Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackson, Utah

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: all towns are inherantly notable (non-admin closure). SeanMD80^{talk | contribs} 18:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson, Utah

The notability of the event [in this article] is questionable in reference to Wikipedia policy (as the sources I have found so far are very small in number), but it's clear that "the explosion and destruction of Jackson, Utah" is the only event this town is notable for. At worst, remove it for not meeting the "independent sources" guideline, at best, move this to an article on the actual explosion, not the city. Spring12 (talk) 23:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It was a real place, and thus notable, plus it has a reliable source. Edward321 (talk) 03:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - All town are inherently notable and this town is no exception, regardless if anyone thinks a railroad explosion "is the only event this town is notable for." I created the article Midland, California and so far I can't find the slightest newsworthy event that took place there, but it's still notable. --Oakshade (talk) 05:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep -- this appears to be a ghost town now, and according to my standards, I'd like to have proof that it was once incorporated, akin to a rotten borough. Its existence has been verified by an article from The New York Times, the gold standard of reliable sourcing. Bearian (talk) 15:15, 24 March 2009 (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.