Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alden, Colorado


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:01, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Alden, Colorado

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No evidence of a community. Maps show a cluster of farm buildings next to former train tracks which suggests this was some sort of railway point. –dlthewave ☎ 17:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Colorado. –dlthewave ☎ 17:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 *  ●Keep-   ●Delete- There are probably many offline sources for this place(doubt we are going to find anyone with access to any), So far I have found this which gives the impression that it is notable.(Not significant coverage). The reason it gives the impression that the place is notable is this statement from the link:
 * 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 19:35, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm not sure why a sugar beet dump and siding would be a notable place. That's not significant coverage or establishment that it was a community. Reywas92Talk 19:46, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The reason it could be notable is not the fact that is was what it was, but who/what it was for: The Union Pacific Railroad 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 02:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: A sugar beet dumping place/railroad siding... This is not notable. Could be a brief mention in the Weld County article. Oaktree b (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * So we're proposing to source this to the unreliable GNIS, hometownlocator and roadsidethoughts which are two of those machine-generated-facts-for-every-GNIS-record WWW sites and just as unreliable as what they are relying upon, and a PDF file that contains 2 sentences. This is a largely undocumented stop on the Union Pacific railroad, used by some farmers for goods if the 2 sentence PDF is to be believed.  It's not in Gannett's 1906 Gazetteer of Colorado at all.  I can find it listed as "freight services only" in a table in a 1964 Official Guide of the Railways and Steam Navigation Lines of the United States, Porto Rico, Canada, Mexico and Cuba, and that's it.  There's no history, no in-depth documentation of any kind, here.  Uncle G (talk) 02:34, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree about Roadside Thoughts and Hometown Locator. Can we get them blacklisted? –dlthewave ☎ 02:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Both Hometown Locator & Roadside Thoughts provide a list of references for every listing they have. See here for Hometown Locator, & Roadside Thoughts listings have them on the listing page. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 04:19, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It has been pointed out many times in many discussions over the years that they and many other WWW sites like them are mechanical regurgitators of GNIS database information, that will yield all sorts of ridiculous stuff such as (indeed) weather reports and hotel listings (sometimes quite far away) for the "towns" of freight railway stations. Lax Wikipedia editorial standards such as believing these WWW sites has only compounded the problem of all sorts of places on the WWW making convincing-seeming representations that there are all of these "unincorporated communities" in the world that are in fact anything from survey corner trees through railway stations to (in one case) a cave.  See Project:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 357, User talk:Marcusmax/Archive 9, Articles for deletion/Stockton, Arizona, Articles for deletion/Bullfrog, Utah, User:BhamBoi/sandbox/CH Sources, and many others. This very encyclopaedia has been a major part of an echo chamber of planetary scale, repeating and bolstering the falsehoods of other GNIS scrapers, whilst editors here have scraped bad GNIS data (see GNIS and Project:Reliability of GNIS data and the whole mass deletion of Carlossuarez46 stubs) by the hundreds of thousands of "unincorporated community" substubs containing outright falsehoods. We have a WikiProject California/GNIS cleanup task force project that is going to take years to undo the harm to human knowledge that we the editorship of Wikipedia have done, and that's just California.  And as you can see . Please break that cycle.  Wikipedia has always been here to do better than the sort of rubbish that the WWW mainly contains.  If memory serves, there's even a Jimmy Wales quote to that effect. Uncle G (talk) 07:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence that it was ever anything but a RR siding.  Eluchil404 (talk) 23:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)


 * 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.