Talk:Madera Canyon (Arizona)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Madera Canyon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120323235855/http://www.pimasheriff.org/files/3812/6929/8203/CompleteHistoryBook.pdf to http://www.pimasheriff.org/files/3812/6929/8203/CompleteHistoryBook.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Merger discussion
Madera Canyon, Arizona, is effectively a ghost town with a well-developed campground built over it. All but a hand full of the homes were evicted and demolished. The main topic for the settlement is better covered now in this page.

IveGoneAway (talk) 03:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose. A geographic feature and a populated place are sufficiently distinct to merit different articles. Libcub (talk) 08:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)


 * You are not wrong, as far as that goes. However, the fact remains that the topic of the populated place that once was in the canyon is only covered in the geographic feature page (3rd and 4th paragraphs of History). The community is not at all covered in the Madera Canyon, Arizona page.


 * It was necessary to evict, demolish, and reclaim the community to develop the recreational area.


 * Would you suggest moving much of the community History to the populated place page? This content is the entire basis for the notability of the populated place page, should it ever be challenged for deletion as other similar communities have been.


 * IveGoneAway (talk) 00:42, 1 February 2023 (UTC) 00:52, 1 February 2023 (UTC) IveGoneAway (talk) 14:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support, as the (formerly) populated place is best contextualized on the arguably more important page that focusses on the geographical feature. Formal reasons are context, short text and overlap. Klbrain (talk) 23:04, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose as per Libcub - any relevant information on the canyon page could also be contained on this page. At the very least either a  or "See also" mention of the populated place on the canyon is warranted. Onel 5969  TT me 11:22, 17 September 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 09:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)