Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dinsmores, California

: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. I'm just deleting the one that's nominated, as the others suggested do not have AfD notices posted. A proper group nomination is probably in order here. – bradv🍁 07:01, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

=[[:Dinsmores, California]]=

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Dinsmores, California}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Dinsmores, California}})

This one was brought up back in the 2009 discussion that originally questioned the mass-production of CA places. Although the original version of "unincorporated community" was soon changed to "locality" per Durham, [https://www.google.com/maps/place/40%C2%B043'11.0%22N+123%C2%B044'20.0%22W/@40.7201448,-123.7401979,1089m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d40.719722!4d-123.738889?hl=en GMaps] doesn't show much of interest, and [https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=0b51736d6cc421e127419ae3c88d8cea the topo] suggests the Dinsmore family lived there (top left), labeled in the same font as "Ridge Cabin" to the east and "Deer Creek Ranch" to the south. Newspaper results are about Dinsmore, California, so it's unclear how this site is notable. Reywas92Talk 04:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Reywas92Talk 04:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Reywas92Talk 04:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Delete - I think at this point we can simply call WP:TNT on all of {{u|Carlossuarez46}}'s 2009 California articles which are referenced only to GNIS/Durham. The essence of a TNT situation is: {{tq|"if the article's content is useless (including all the versions in history) but the title might be useful, then delete the content to help encourage a new article. If you keep the article, then you're keeping something of no value until someone replaces it with something of value, when people tend to be more inclined to fill red links"}}. This is clearly that kind of situation - these articles exist, which dissuades anyone from creating them in better form, but they are also garbage, with probably at most 1-in-20 being a WP:GEOLAND pass and then only with detailed research for each one of those 20. GNIS is a bad source, and Durham may be a good source but it has not been cited correctly whenever it has been checked (i.e., the locales it is being referenced for aren't communities that were ever inhabited). Much better for the project to delete all and then recreate the ones that can be recreated. {{u|Reywas92}}, {{u|Cxbrx}},{{u|Hog Farm}}, {{u|Mangoe}} (users pinged as they have all recently contributed in AFDs involving California locales only sourced to GNIS/Durham) - I would support simply adding all of these California location articles that are cited only to GNIS/Durham and TNTing them in one go rather than separately PROD/AFD for each one. FOARP (talk) 09:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Based on a quick review of the articles listed at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Former_populated_places_in_California&from=0 Category:Former populated places] in California that are cited only to Durham/GNIS and which do not mention a post-office, I propose also:

{{columns-list|colwidth=10em|

}}

:....and this is just the "A"s FOARP (talk) 10:01, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

{{columns-list|colwidth=10em|

}}

:....and now the Bs. All of the above are cited to ultimately to GNIS/Durham, except Beal, California as noted. FOARP (talk) 12:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

{{columns-list|colwidth=10em|

}}

:...and that's the Cs down. Seriously, at some point in the process of creating ~2 times more articles for ghost towns in California than there are for currently-inhabited places the realisation that California just doesn't have that many ghost towns should have dawned. FOARP (talk) 14:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

{{columns-list|colwidth=10em|

}}

:....that's the Ds down. FOARP (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Thanks! I compared the above list with [http://ghosttowns.com/states/ca/caalpha.html the CA list in ghosttowns.com], which it appears that you did too, because you found [http://ghosttowns.com/states/ca/dedrick.html Dedrick]. I found no other matches between the above list and ghosttowns.com.

:I think reasonable criteria for WP:TNT would be articles articles with the following characteristics:

:* Have only a Durham citation and do not appear in GNIS and do not appear in ghosttowns.com. These are almost certainly not notable.

:* Have only Durham and GNIS citations and do not appear in ghosttowns.com. These are probably not notable.

:In the above list, I'd like to keep Coso (former settlement), California because I found a [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Ghost_Towns_of_Death_Valley/CZFQBAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Coso reference] (which I just added) that includes a bit of text and some photos. As this Coso is on China Lake Naval Weapons Station, it is not likely to have much modern coverage. This Coso is possibly not notable, but should probably be considered separately. Cxbrx (talk) 17:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

::Hi {{u|Cxbrx}} very happy to strike Coso from the list. I think it's likely a duplicate of Coso Junction, California, which is also next to China Lake and used to be called Coso, but like you say that can be discussed separately. I believe every other one of the above list meets your TNT criteria (the only additional sources are clearly non-relevant - eg the pronunciation guide for Deseret - or duplicates of GNIS data). FOARP (talk) 18:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

:::Coso (former settlement), California and Coso Junction, California are two separate locations. Coso Junction, California is probably not notable. I'm not sure about Coso (former settlement), California. Cxbrx (talk) 04:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Soft delete all Checking these in Durham's California's Geographic Names that I just got a copy of, there is clearly widespread misrepresentation of the source going on. For Darwin, California, the cited p. 1096 has under the entry for Reedley: "California Mining Bureau's (1917a) map shows a place called Darwin located along the railroad..." and that's it. Cordua Bar, California's source under the Timbuctoo entry on page 568 says "Cordua Bar, named in 1848 for Theodore Cordua, who kept a trading post there, was on the north bank of of Yuba River." On what basis is this "a former mining town" or notable? Blinzing, California is actually "Blinzig" in Durham, which calls it a "locality", and says "From 1909 until 1912 this place was a railroad siding that served Camp Enjoyment..." This was misrepresented as "its railroad station served..." It did not have a station, it was the station, as [https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv_browse.pl?id=b8c9d63de4ae043054c1a4cf75c58eca the topo] (using "Blinzig") makes clear! Look, if there are substantive sources that describe these places as actual, notable communities not just names on maps they are welcome to be recreated, but this distortion of what the source says is widespread and must be more efficiently addressed. Reywas92Talk 22:45, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
  • According to [http://pbbooks.com/caindex.htm], Deseret, California, Dedrick, California, Bullards Bar, California, Buchanan, Madera County, California. Butte Creek, California also had a post office, but Helltown, California is also known as Butte Creek, so I'm not sure what to do there. Unless we get non-trivial coverage for these locations with post offices, I certainly would not stand in the way of deletion of them. About Blinzig vs Blinzing, I see that Blinzig has no GNIS entry, but Blinzing does, so perhaps Durham has a typo? Searching Gudde will take some time, but I doubt if there is non-trivial coverage there. Cxbrx (talk) 04:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • :No the typo is in GNIS, the topos say Blinzig. Reywas92Talk 05:27, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all Durham-only entries excluding the ghosttown.com cases. I haven't worked much with the former populated places, but when I have, the ones I have done sourced only to Durham have universally turned out to be a frustrating waste of time to attempt to verify. And even for real settlements, listing in a single omnium gatherum work just does not satisfy WP:GNG, and that's before the recent revelation that Durham's classification has been consistently misrepresented and that most of these are just place names that aren't even on a map. As far as the GNIS-and-Durham former settlements, I cannot offer my support on this group, having done vanishingly few of these, but I wouldn't oppose a TNT deletion of them as well. Mangoe (talk) 16:14, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all the articles that FOARP suggests. This is to onerous to deal with case-by-case when the majority to all of the articles are actively spreading disinformation. Any sufficiently significant locations could be refunded on request by an editor other than Carlossuarez46. — Bilorv (talk) 00:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Delete all Sloppily created and if something falls through the cracks, it's an easy enough thing to reverse. The alternative is a monumental use of resources on a giant series of articles that should have, quite frankly, never existed.CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Soft delete all - Negligent mass-creation. I've looked at a lot of these over the last month, and the vast majority of those citing just GNIS, Durham, or both are generally non-community rubbish. Anything that turns out to be significant can be recreated. Hog Farm Bacon 03:23, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.