Talk:Nora, Wisconsin
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Nora isn't a community, it's a bar called "nora's II"[edit]
Even if you look at the "citiation", it's recognizes the location is also called "Nora's Place" which is the name of the bar. The bar is in Deerfield [1]. Even their OWN FACEBOOK PAGE states their address in Deerfield. [2] This needs a speedy delete. Timmccloud (talk) 15:25, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but multiple sources indicate that Nora is a community, not just a bar. The USGS recognizes it as a community, as do the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (on their Dane County highway map) and the Wisconsin Historical Society. There also appear to be several houses surrounding the bar based on Google Maps street view, which indicates that the bar is not the only thing at this location. Nora may have once been a larger community as well, though I don't have any sources about its past. Keep in mind that not all small unincorporated communities are census-designated places with boundaries, nor do they all have post offices, and some don't have signage. That doesn't mean they aren't communities if reliable sources indicate they are, which in this case they do. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 03:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you both for your notes in my talk page and here, but I think you both are using a very diluted and extremely low standard for entry into Wikipedia. A couple houses nearby in google maps street view doesn't create a community - if they did, every housing development over 5 houses in the country would warrant an article. Using the historical society as a reference is also pretty weak; unless there is a historical significance about the place (there isn't - otherwise it would be part of the historical society record) it doesn't warrant an article either; Wikipedia does have notability guidelines you know. I don't believe just because you can get an "official" hit on some database nobody has cleaned out for years means the location/community is notable - and it's just as likely that because one database somewhere had a hit on Nora, that was used as seed information and replicated the data elsewhere. And finally the Wisconsin DOT makes note public hunting grounds, dirt roads and places like the rockdale milpond on the map - none of which rate a wikipeida entry because they aren't notable and neither is Nora. Maybe sometime 100 years ago Nora was a thriving community; now it's a bar, a couple houses and a couple farms. When you can dredge up the history of the place and make a notable article I would agree, but I don't agree that Nora is notable enough to even warrant a stub of an article. Timmccloud (talk)