Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Geography

Purdy Hill, Indiana

Purdy Hill, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is another case where lack of info leaves us with quite the puzzle. Baker describes it as a "locale", which I wouldn't take as damning per se, and there is a string of residences along the road as far back as I can get; from the streetview car they appear to date from the 1900s onward. But that is all I can get: I'm getting increasingly annoyed with Google finding stuff I wasn't looking for, but still, I came up with nothing, except the usual clickbait and similarly named places in other states. I think we need more evidence here. Mangoe (talk) 20:21, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:46, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect >>> Posey Township, Clay County, Indiana. Djflem (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Mangoe (talk) 21:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• As of a 1975 inventory of dam inspections, the Department of the Army believed that a village by that name existed, but other than being downstream from a non-notable dam, that doesn't offer any help. Even a pretty deep-dive search of Internet Archive scanned media offered absolutely nothing. The redirect to Posey Township, Clay County, Indiana -- where this is included in a list of unincorporated communities -- may be the best call. This verifiably exists/ed in some fashion, but as far as I can tell, no one -- ever -- took note of that and we can't really say anything else at all. Lubal (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shady Lane, Indiana

Shady Lane, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

According to Baker, this was... a shady lane. Supposedly they used excessively green sycamore logs to make a stretch of corduroy road, and the ends sprouted and produced a line of sycamores on either side of the road. YMMV, as they say, but at any rate he says nothing about "tree-lined streets" or about streets at all. And he certainly doesn't identify it as a settlement in any way. The maps are of no particular help since I couldn't find one that had the name on it until it was back-added from GNIS, so it's hard to say where exactly this was supposed to have been. The one dominant feature on all maps and aerials I saw was a substantial factory complex south of the area; it's now a bulldozed ruin, so I have no idea what it was. Searching hits lots of other Shady Lanes but although there's a geological reference to it, there's no such road name in the vicinity that I can find. So I don't think this is a real place. Mangoe (talk) 02:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Skynxnex (talk) 04:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No information found, other than the cited source, which is completely misrepresented by saying this is a community. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• General note: I've noticed a lot of these settlements I created ages ago coming up for deletion. I believe at the time I was just creating articles for red links in the county-level "Municipalities and communities" templates. I have no opinion on whether they are notable or not (or whether they get deleted or not); I assume you all are already removing the communities from the templates when these items are deleted. Thanks! Sweet kate (talk) 17:22, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old Hill, Indiana

Old Hill, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be a farmstead. Searching finds a cemetery that's in Brazil (IN), an old hill, and various juxtapositions, and lots of real estate hits, but nothing whatsoever that says anything I can clearly attribute to this place. Mangoe (talk) 23:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I did some editing and adding of sources. I would conclude based on what I've seen so far that "Old Hill" is really just a place name, though at times rural residents may be credited as living in the "Old Hill" area. It is a known local topographic feature/location. Since it appears as a place name on USGS maps, it creeped into GNIS and later wikipedia.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 19:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump, Ohio

Trump, Ohio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not seem to have any significant coverage according to WP:NOTE ImTheAvidPheasant (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Ohio. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It's hard to do a before on this for obvious reasons. I found a few Ohio place name books, and Stark county history books. This is the only way to quickly tackle the problem, and at the end of the day Unincorporated places are not legally recognized and need secondary source for notability. The Trump family were early settlers in stark county, but I find no mention of any place called trump in the books I could find. My carefully considered opinion is this is just a neighborhood in Canton, Ohio. We delete neighborhoods all the time.James.folsom (talk) 01:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Stark County! Famous for Phil Davison. The "Trump" location is now in Canton, but no one calls it "Trump". Trump appears on the 1901/03 USGS 1:62500 maps as a place name, though not with any noticeable development aside from residences along the road leading to Canton.[1]. The next more detailed map in 1958 (1:24000) doesn't list it anymore.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 14:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lighthouse Beach, New South Wales

Lighthouse Beach, New South Wales (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Since nobody has found a reliable source in over 10 years, there likely won't be any more sources. I couldn't find any sources either. EternalNub (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. EternalNub (talk) 17:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:04, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*WP:PROD would have been good for this. Australia has lots of beaches, without sources Delete Reywas92^Talk 18:23, 24 May 2024 (UTC) Struck per HEY Reywas92^Talk 16:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Plenty of sources available, and it's a WP:GEOFEAT so doesn't need to specifically clear the GNG bar: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Needs adoption, not deletion. SportingFlyer T·C 18:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I've added several references, an infobox, and prose to the article. (I've left the "doesn't meet GNG" box up until this AfD is closed - if the closer could please remove it.) SportingFlyer T·C 07:35, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Have also added a few sources. Expect more could be done on the shark attack aspect by those with access to better Australian sources than I. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:03, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Six Points, Clay County, Indiana

Six Points, Clay County, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A passing reference by Baker to a "community" at this intersection (and the GNIS coords are inaccurate: the location is ESE of the label which they used as the location) is not enough. There's nothing much there, and I wasn't able to find anything myself. Mangoe (talk) 20:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 20:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No evidence of a notable community at this location. –dlthewave ☎ 03:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Its clear this is a nonotable intersection.James.folsom (talk) 02:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sarecta, North Carolina

Sarecta, North Carolina (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an alleged former town in North Carolina, which was allegedly the first town in its county. I couldn't find anything reliable supporting the existence of this community, Henry McCulloh appears to be his own can of worms, but I don't think there's much on him either. It's also worth noting that this article hasn't been edited since 2014, and the one reference (which is not cited inline) is now a dead link. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and North Carolina. -Samoht27 (talk) 16:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I don't see any reason why this wouldn't be a reliable source. This probably warrants more care to determine its level of scholarship, but also offers greater depth of coverage. Lubal (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  They were not considered because the main subject of those sources is not "sarecta", therefore they are "passing mentions", eg not sig cov. James.folsom (talk) 17:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Passes WP:GEOLAND and also WP:GNG, per my search which found the books above and also some mentions in scholarly articles. SportingFlyer T·C 19:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Per sources presented above and incorporated status. –dlthewave ☎ 03:37, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Definite keep. Added some sourcing and 1943 map showing location. Very fascinating to see that older states in the United States have formerly incorporated towns that have sunk so far into oblivion to lead to a deletion nomination. Apparently it still had a charter from the state until 1984 although it (and many other towns in the state) had long had no local government. But it was definitely was incorporated in 1787, though losing a battle to be the county seat in 1784 was apparently a blow.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 15:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I found it was surprising how contentious county seats were, and how many "towns" disappeared for that reason. James.folsom (talk) 17:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Man on the Hill

Man on the Hill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, contains a concerning amount of copyvioed material and close paraphrasing, created in draftspace and accepted by a sock. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 15:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Canada. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 15:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to WP:GNG concerns. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 14:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Katokhar, Ambedkar Nagar

Katokhar, Ambedkar Nagar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Found nothing per WP:GEOLAND as no census data and history found. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Place does exist as you can find bank like Union bank of India in this location but no significant coverage can be found in reliable sources for this geographical location to presume it to be notable. RangersRus (talk) 13:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poshtkuh-e Shamil

Poshtkuh-e Shamil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I originally nominated this for PROD with the following justification, which I largely stand by: None of the cited sources clearly indicate a place by this name in Farsi, although there are partial title matches. There is no corresponding page on fa.wiki. This is likely a GNIS ghost or some other error. Sources all relate to Hormozgan province, but there's no useful mention at that page that could justify a redirect.

Now, since opening a PROD for this page with the above reasoning, a new account has repeatedly attempted to refbomb the page with a mountain poorly formatted citations, most of which have the same aforementioned problem of referring to a Poshtkuh (پشتکوه) but not a Poshtkuh-e Shamil (پشتکوه شمیل). However, I do note that at least one of the new sources does refer to "Poshtkuh, Shamil Region" (پشتکوه بخش شمیل) [9]. The level of coverage is still such that I think we fall short of meeting WP:GNG or WP:NGEO--we have basically no verifiable claims about the region to build an article around, and it is not self-evident that this is a distinct, recognized populated place. "Poshtkuh" essentially means "behind the mountain" in Farsi, and could easily be an informal descriptor rather than an actual defined place. Thus, I think that a redirect to Shamil Rural District and extended-confirmed protection of the page is appropriate. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iran. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 13:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per nom. The creator was blocked for sockpuppetry so this article was likely to have been an innocent looking geostub intended to get their edit count up. Mccapra (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zesławicki Lagoon

Zesławicki Lagoon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A small artificial reservoir in suburban Krakow; fails WP:GNG. Both sources in the article are WP:USERGENERATED; a BEFORE search does not unearth any additional qualifying sources. Under WP:NGEO, an artificial infrastructure entity qualifies for notability under GNG and otherwise redirects to the notable feature that prompted its creation. In this case, the river the the lagoon impounds is not notable and thus, without qualifying sources, neither its the lagoon itself. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• I haven't translated these but a search for "Zalew Zesławicki" brings up [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]. I'm not sure if all of these pass GNG, for instance the last one is just a single sentence, but there's at least sources. SportingFlyer T·C 06:38, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Its likely notable as a geographic feature. There will be the countries water body reference i.e. a Bathymetrical register that describes width/height/depth and 100 other properties. scope_creep^Talk 08:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It is not listed in the official Polish directory of bodies of water: WYKAZ NAZW WÓD STOJĄCYCH (LIST OF NAMES OF STANDING WATERS). Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ceres, Washington

Ceres, Washington (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A belated prod undeletion: Ceres is a rail station with a general store, the post office was cabinet in the general store [16]. It's also a hill nearby. The area is known as Ceres Hill, so likely needs a move if not deleted.

Original reasoning:Not a notable location. All of the sources mentioned are either trivial mentions or are insufficient for notability (GNIS; Jim Forte). Only reference 6 approaches reliability, and it plainly states that Ceres was just a road-rail crossing with a general store, and the post office was a "pigeon cabinet" in the corner of the store. Satellite images reveal the store and railroad are both gone now, with a single farmhouse nearby. Non-notable; fails WP:GEOLAND. (proposed by WeirdNAnnoyed) James.folsom (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. James.folsom (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (as the PRODder) for reasons given above. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 02:22, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nomination. Non-notable community. TH1980 (talk) 00:17, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but rewrite/reclassify as a former community. A long read is available at the Talk:Ceres, Washington page with details in early history of Ceres. I agree that such a community no longer exists, but it did from the late 1890s and with some strength into the late 1930s. Small, rural communities are rarely given due historical attention, but thanks to local reporting, even if in snippets, we can see the Ceres community that once existed. If via consensus we keep the article, I volunteer to rewrite and expand the page.Shortiefourten (talk) 19:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The sources compiled by Shortiefourten on the article talk page shows this is a recognized populated place sufficient to be kept. The Origin of Washington Geographic Names sources also calls it a "town", though I understand that to be in the American way that rural areas gathered community identities.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 18:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone volunteering to rewrite this article as proposed by one editor?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz Me, me, me! I do, I do, I do! I'm out of action this Memorial Day weekend but I can certainly start working on it by Tuesday, using the sourcing already found. Thanks! Shortiefourten (talk) 15:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forest, Washington

Forest, Washington (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reference 2 on the article itself is Meany's place names, and he says that Forest was a post office briefly located at Newaukum prairie. Please remember that post offices back then did not always use the same name as the place where they were, in alot a cases that place didn't exist.The fourth reference (jtenton) is a semi unreliable source that also says it was post office, and the sources used to make that claim are basically also the story of a post office, a school district, and election district named forest. It was also earlier a grange district. As you might imagine such things appear in newspapers but you want find any of those news papers that ever say it was a town. The remaining sources are of no use, and I haven't found anything further than those that actually give any substance on it. James.folsom (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. James.folsom (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Forgot this part, Washington State place names [17] couldn't be bothered to mention it and it was published in the '70s.James.folsom (talk) 00:03, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep on the basis of the explanations at the article's talk page, Talk:Forest, Washington. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 13:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Please see the Talk:Forest, Washington for my sourcing research. Forest, though never large, has existed as a community in some form or fashion since the late 1890s. Instead of deletion, we simply expand the article, fleshing out the details. I volunteer to do so. Shortiefourten (talk) 17:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 04:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Shortiefourten's comment on the talk page. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Puerta Real (Granada)

Puerta Real (Granada) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced since 2014 and does not seem to meet notability criteria per WP:NPLACE. I can't find non-trivial coverage in independent and reliable sources, only mentions of the name in the context of directions and addresses, but never descriptions in detail (not in English, at any rate). The article defines it as a neighbourhood, but it is not an official district I can identify: downtown Granada is called simply Centro (e.g. see Spanish Wiki articles Distrito Centro (Granada) or Distritos de Granada). Even the Spanish version of the article isn't promising: the only somewhat detailed sources are a tour agency website and a blog post, neither of which counts as reliable. This topic could be mentioned in another overview article or a future article about the Centro district, but unlikely to be helpful and verifiable on its own. R Prazeres (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Spain. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This surprises me, while the Spanish sources are mostly blogspots the book in the bibliography on the well-developed Spanish language page has six pages devoted to Puerta Real, and there are many possible Spanish language sources. [18] [19] [20] along with hits from academic sources [21]. SportingFlyer T·C 06:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - sourcing as indicated by SportingFlyer seems adequate. Ingratis (talk) 04:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of explorations

List of explorations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be a WP:INDISCRIMINATE list without clear inclusion criteria. It states that it has the most "important" explorations without referencing who calls them important besides the article creator. Even if notable, it would fall under WP:TNT and is invalid as a navigational list as it does not link to articles specifically about those explorations. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Archaeology, Geography, Spaceflight, and Transportation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, at least in its current form. I have no idea what the ambit is supposed to be - what are "state societies"? Does the author have any idea what they are intending, as that term is linked to the utterly uninformative Complex society? If what is meant is "state-sponsored exploration", then why does it include entires like the hypothetical discovery of Hawaii in late antiquity, or Livingstone's privately funded explorations? No rhyme or reason here. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 05:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  A society with a state; the opposite of a stateless society. It's a well-defined and widely used term in the social sciences. – Joe (talk) 09:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah so. That should link to Complex society#States then, I guess? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, edit, and update. A 2001 long-term article, the page lists the first sponsored human expeditions of various locals. The topic is notable, links to various expeditionary pages, and groups these expeditions on one page. The criteria needs to be worded differently, but that's a minor point in the overall scope of the page. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:35, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  See WP:ARTICLEAGE. When it was written is not proof it should be kept. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Essays have some who agree and others who disagree. Early Wikipedia articles which have stood the test of 23 years of time should receive more leeway and correction. This one has a very good premise which can be refined and expanded. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, on the one hand, this is a very bare-bones list, and seems to have been so for quite a while. There's no real context, and it isn't exactly the best-formatted list ever. That said, I do think that the idea behind it is notable enough. I personally think that it should be rewritten as prose and moved to History of human exploration, but it could also be rewritten as prose and merged with History of human migration (though they are substantially different, especially when it comes to things like oceans or planets). I don't think keeping it as a list is a good idea, even though List of explorers is a good, closely related list, as explorations really should have some explanation and context to them, whereas explorers don't really need that. Ships & Space_(Edits) 00:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I would agree with Ships&Space. Overhauling should be done, not deletion. Lorstaking (talk) 09:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I am not opposed to a rewrite as a prose article. But in the 23 years the article has been around, nothing has been done to fix the problem. I am not sure why you believe it will be fixed in another 23 years. A deletion may encourage a new article to be created that is actually notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Common sense, just list any explorations that have their own articles or have articles for the explorers who are notable for making them. Dream Focus 07:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, pretty much per Dream Focus. I would note that a noteworthy exploration need not have its own article to merit inclusion, if it is mentioned and cited in a supertopic article. BD2412 T 22:55, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a low-quality list article duplicating List of explorers. Not opposed to keeping this somewhere outside of mainspace if wanted as a reference for a stand-alone history of exploration article. Walsh90210 (talk) 00:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I'm very borderline, but will lean keep because I think the list can be improved. I think it needs to be refocused by being retitled to something like 'List of notable explorations', and it needs a very clear and stringent inclusion criteria that other lists have, for example, List of video games considered the best.

Melmann 07:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chak 15 DNB

Chak 15 DNB (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. Non-notable village. Article is completely unsourced, and there isn't any evidence of notability either. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:46, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I have added the GPS coordinates from Google Maps. The place does exist (and has buildings), but I can't find any good online sources about the location. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, without other sources than a map, it is not an encyclopedic article. Looking at the category, there is no precedent to create individual articles about the chaks in the district. If anything, they could be covered in a list. Geschichte (talk) 03:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Bahawalpur as an ATD. Only one of the villages in this category has sources, so a separate list seems inappropriate. Better to redirect them each to the main article until the subjects draw sourcing requiring their expansion. BusterD (talk) 07:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I have boldly redirected two (both wholly unsourced) of the four village articles in the category as I've asserted above. I have left Channan Pir alone because it seems to have some sourcing. In the event this page is deleted, I propose to redirect the pagespace as I've suggested above. BusterD (talk) 07:52, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is anyone concerned these redirects are not mentioned in Bahawalpur? ~Kvng (talk) 16:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wilson, Indiana

Wilson, Indiana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Here we have a puzzle. There are two data implying that this a rail point. First, the label starts out right next to the tracks before drifting south on more recent maps, towards a string of houses on Rt. 60. Second, GMaps informs us that the name of the road that crosses the tracks at this point is named "Wilson Switch Rd." Against this I have, well, nothing, because searching is pretty much hopeless. The question is whether that string of houses is now known as Wilson or not, and here I draw a blank. Mangoe (talk) 03:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• This is an interesting one, partly because there seem to be multiple names associated with the same location. A 1908 map identifies the settlement as "Dallas", while others like this plat map show it as "Wilson". (An 1875 map gives it as "Wilson Station" and notes an accompanying mill.) When time permits I'll aim to check the local histories in more detail, but the fact that it's been consistently present on area maps for the last 150 years suggests it was at one point an actual settlement, so for now I think it's best to keep it. ╠╣uw [talk] 09:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Searching for just Wilson got me nowhere, so I tried Wilson Switch, and I got some interesting results. A 1973 story about sales tax called Wilson Switch a community of 300, but this 1991 story about the local landfill just refers to the locals as "Wilson Switch Road residents", as do later stories about landfill projects. Earlier mentions of Wilson Switch were mostly about car accidents or railway incidents in the area, which doesn't clarify much. Wilson is still on the latest Indiana state highway map, though I don't know how thorough Indiana is about vetting small communities. Not sure which way I lean on this one. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 01:11, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can still sleep at night if this is deleted. It's Rail station on the C., I. & L. (Monon) Railway [22], this same source explains that the post office was called Dallas. Lest we not forgot that old post offices were one word names, and were not required to share a name with their location. Huwmanbeing's observation that it is variously known as Dallas, Wilson's switch, and Wilson suggests it doesn't have a strong identity and that people were just referring to the landmarks as a way of being clear about locations. That book I cite above would use the place as a reference if it actually existed. Google snippets from this source [23] states the area around the switch was known as Dallas, and later Wilson, and is an "Unplatted village". I believe that source is just assuming that the place was called Dallas because of the post office at or near the train station. The name Wilson is almost certainly taken from the station, and post office was probably just that. The local paper only has mentions of for about 20 or so years starting 1942. Just life activities of people living near it. The satellite imagery would be very different if some sort population center had existed there in the twentieth century. Be careful researching it, it's not the only rail infrastructure with this name.James.folsom (talk) 22:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]