Talk:Fenelon Township

Dealing with small communities which redirect to parent municipalities with regards to Facebook
While the work on this page and this project by the volunteers is to be lauded, having Cameron, Ontario redirect to Fenelon Township is causing problems for people with businesses and organizations in Cameron Ontario. There are over 900 addresses in Cameron. Facebook bases its place names on Wilkipedia, and Cameron, Ontario businesses and organizations cannot list their correct addresses on Facebook due to this redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YrHelperInfonut (talk • contribs) 12:21, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The problem with removing them is that you'd have dozens of communities without an article, which are currently covered (albeit poorly) in the article of the parent jurisdiction (at least before 2001). A better course of action may be to try and contact Facebook and get them to allow entries for the multitude of places worldwide that have no Wikipedia article. -  Floydian  τ ¢  19:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I have to disagree, the best solution is to improve the content of the redirected pages, so that the contain sufficient information to qualify as stand alone pages. A redirect is really only desirable when a place is the same place. i.e.an article titled cinematic theatres would redirect to Cinemas. To redirect place names to Townships in City of Kawartha Lakes, or to City of Kawartha Lakes would be the equivalent of redirecting City of Kawartha Lakes to Ontario. - YrHelperInfonut  τ ¢ 07:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Many of these unincorporated communities aren't worthy of an article. If you look at Kawartha_Lakes, maybe only 20 of those are places with history in my book on Victoria County. The rest are real estate -coined places. Facebook built a broken system, it's not Wikipedia that is responsible for adapting. However, because this is a significant concern affecting places worldwide, I've started an rfc to get some wider community input. -  Floydian  τ ¢  16:15, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help trying to solve the problem of businesses and organizations being able to add their addresses to Facebook. Here is what I have tried to do to help solve the problem with people trying to add their business addresses on Facebook for Cameron, Ontario. On Facebook, someone had merged Cameron, Ontario with Fenelon Township. I removed the merge as it is not the same place as Fenelon Township, However, the same article still showed from Wikipedia. I then created a wikiipedia page for Cameron. Now,when you search for Cameron, Ontario on Facebook,you get this result: A write up about Fenelon Township. When you click 'edit on wikipedia' it directs to the Fenelon Township page. When you click 'read more', the new Cameron, Ontario page shows, but the map showing the location of Cameron does not show - the map of Fenelon Township shows, and clicking on the map directs to the Fenelon Township map page.  YrHelperInfonut  τ ¢ 06:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You'll have to purge your temporary internet files, and it may possibly take a few days for facebook to update its copy. Cameron is one of those towns with some history (although I'm worried that what you've put in at Cameron, Ontario may be a lot of copied text (at least the school history), which is infringement and can't be done here. If so, you should go put the info into your own words. -  Floydian  τ ¢  15:20, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Basically, the rule is that any named community about which a proper article, citing proper reliable sources, can be written is allowed to stand alone as an independent article topic — but a community is not entitled to an unreferenced article just because it exists, and is restricted to being a redirect to its parent municipality until such time as that proper article, citing proper reliable sources, can actually be written. If there are issues with Facebook's system, then it's Facebook's responsibility to fix that problem on their end — we don't owe businesses in Cameron a way to improve their visibility on Facebook, if doing so requires us to compromise our content policies.

A community inside a larger municipality is a valid article topic if a valid article about it can be written — but that community is not entitled to keep a bad and/or unsourced article just because you're having problems with Facebook, and as currently written you have yet to add even one acceptably reliable source to that separate article on Cameron. Virtually all of your sources are primary sources such as an organization or institution in the community being sourced only to its own webpage — which is not legitimate sourcing.

And just for the record, a redirect is not only desirable in the case of place names which are exactly synonymous with each other; it is valid and warranted in any situation where a topic which either does not have or does not qualify for its own independent article, but is still a plausible enough search term that we can legitimately maintain some information about it in another related topic, has any substantive relationship to that other topic. A person of marginal notability can be redirected to any article in which his name is mentioned, even if that article's primary topic is his grandmother. A community can be redirected to a larger related topic, such as the municipality that governs it. And on and so forth — being an exact synonym of the target article is not a requirement or precondition of a redirect. Bearcat (talk) 23:35, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

❌ Nope. Just here for RfC. Agree Bearcat. Let Facebook (market cap $152.35 billion) solve its own problems. 94.193.139.22 (talk) 14:04, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Bearcat sums it up well. The best solution would be to find some reliable sources to create the article as a stand alone. We are not beholden to facebook or any other organisation when it comes to including articles. AIR corn (talk) 10:09, 11 April 2014 (UTC)