Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bluestem, Washington

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Per WP:GEOLAND, places must either be legally recognized or notable per WP:GNG to qualify for an article. Keep voters in this discussion did not convincingly demonstrate either of those requirements. (Just saying "legally recognized town" doesn't make it so.) Therefore, after the keep votes have been discarded, consensus is to delete. I'm happy to restore the article for the purpose of merging, if anyone is interested. —⁠ScottyWong⁠— 06:55, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bluestem, Washington

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Bluestem, Washington (edit | 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)

It's the usual isolated-grain-elevator-by-the-tracks situation, in this case apparently unaltered for some forty years at least. The Wash. place names DB says it was originally platted as Moscow before being renamed, but there's no significant evidence that anything like a town was ever built other than that the road runs parallel to the rails at an unusual distance; there's a decaying shed and a building that looks like it might be an office for the elevator, but that's it. I get one person born there, but I take those with a grain of salt. Otherwise I get a lot of hits about railroad construction and to the wheat variety itself, as well as various native grasses of the same name. Mangoe (talk) 00:30, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mangoe's work on these GNIS stubs is commendable, but frankly it should be unnecessary, because the fact that these is literally nothing to write about this place, and the article is essentially a directory-listing, should be reason enough to delete it. FOARP (talk) 08:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a bunch of passing mentions that say absolutely nothing about the actual place, other than at guy called Tom Haji might have been born there. In what way does this actually show notability? What actual article can you write about it? FOARP (talk) 19:37, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep always going to be a stub, but seems to be a valid ghost town per GEOLAND/finding the same sources as Eastmain/some mentions in the state legislature. Passing mentions are irrelevant for GEOLAND. SportingFlyer T·C 20:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
where’s the evidence of actual legal recognition (and not just “some govt document mentioned it”)? Without legal recognition, you've got to show a WP:GNG pass. FOARP (talk) 21:45, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How does it meet Geoland? FOARP (talk) 05:12, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Merge to Lincoln County, Washington #Communities - Appears to be a non-notable town/community; the sources presented above are merely passing mentions and do not meet SIGCOV. Per WP:WHYN: "We require "significant coverage" in reliable sources so that we can actually write a whole article, rather than half a paragraph or a definition of that topic. If only a few sentences could be written and supported by sources about the subject, that subject does not qualify for a separate page, but should instead be merged into an article about a larger topic or relevant list." –dlthewave ☎ 15:58, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. The Keep position here appears to be "any place that was arguably populated at any point is notable", but this has no basis at all in guides or policy. A pass under WP:GEOLAND#1 requires legal recognition, which simply isn't evident in anything produced above or found in my WP:BEFORE. As far as I can see the mention in State Senate records is related to railway building, and does not in anyway confer legal recognition on Bluestem as a populated community, rather it highlights that this place may well have just been a railway station, and not a meaningful community of any kind. FOARP (talk) 13:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I do not see any reason why the news snippets shared above provide any notability towards GNG. GEOLAND only confers presumed notability to populated, legally recognized places, not just any place where a few people might have lived a long time ago; GNIS and databases does not constitute legal recognition. There seems to be an idea that always pops up in these discussions, that if a place exists at all and anyone has ever lived there, it must be notable, but that is plainly false. The sources pointed about above do not in any way help the case for this article to exist and can in no way be used to sustain it. Info on non-notable people shouldn't even be mentioned in settlement articles per guidelines like Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline#Notable people (To be included in a list of notable people, individuals must still meet the notability requirements per WP:PEOPLE.), so why should sources about them impact notability in any way? eviolite (talk) 18:57, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. More than just a railroad stop with a post office. Legally recognized town. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:43, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Which source supports your assertion that this was a "legally recognized town"? –dlthewave ☎ 16:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Merger per Dlthewave. There is enough usage to support a redirect and a few sentences in the county article. While there is not enough info to write an article, we should at least cover it somewhere as people could search for it. MB 01:52, 9 December 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bluestem,_Washington&oldid=1059729572"