Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aldridge, West Virginia


 * 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. To the extent that the WP:GEOLAND criterion is met, which it does not appear to be, even this only makes something "typically presumed to be notable" and the consensus at this discussion is that it is not. Stifle (talk) 11:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Aldridge, West Virginia

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not a populated place, it's a locale (geography). 1981 USGS report calls it a locale, which falls below the treshhold of WP:GEOLAND. Topographic maps suggest a minor point on the railroad. County history suggests its a depot. Station mentioned. Most newspapers.com and Google books hits are for last names. As a locale, it fails WP:GEOLAND, and there's not enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. Hog Farm Bacon 15:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 15:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 15:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)


 * delete It's clearly a point on the railroad, and one which, it appears, disappeared relatively early as such things go, and the name on the map migrates around conspicuously, so that the oldest topos showing a building by the tracks place it (and the name) a bit to the east of the spot indicated by GNIS. I see no evidence of a real settlement. Mangoe (talk) 01:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: Sourced by the USGS, a highly-reliable source. -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 15:27 on October 16, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * - The USGS document listed calls it a locale, which by definition fails WP:GEOLAND, as locales are defined as places without permanent human population. The GNIS source linked in the article is a low-quality database and does not reach the normal reliability of USGS publications, see WP:GNIS for more information. Hog Farm Bacon 15:41, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. "Locale" is not listed in GEOLAND, I did a word search on the page.  An unincorporated community is not, in fact, a locale.  It is just what is says, a community that has not be incorporated by charter.  West Virginia is known (same with Virginia) for having MANY unincorporated communities.  Some unincorporated communities, do in fact, have their own services.  Two examples: Arthurdale, West Virginia and Independence, West Virginia are both unincorporated communities located in Preston County, West Virginia, both have post offices.  Some unincorporated communities don't, most do.  Because while they are unincorporated, they do need mail.  So, I stand by my !vote. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 16:03 on October 16, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * - The point I was making is that since a locale is defined as As defined by the United States Geological Survey, a locale is a geographic place at which there is or was human activity. It does not include populated places (such as cities, settlements, towns, or villages), mines, and dams., by definition it cannot be a populated, legally recognized place. Not all unincorporated communities are locales. Neither of the two examples you gave are locales. Hog Farm Bacon 16:23, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If you want to get into semantics, you could say New York City is a locale. But you listed GEOLAND and the word "locale" is not listed.  Furthermore, in the USGS filing, it says this Populated (Community) Place (except those associated with facilities). A populated place that is not a census designated or incorporated place having an official federally recognized name.  So, they consider it a populated place. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 16:47 on October 16, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * GNIS is not terribly reliable when it comes to identifying the nature of a place; see WP:GNIS for further explanation of this. Even for its intended purpose (establishing the name of a place) it occasionally slips, but "populated place" as a classification has been found to include everything from ranches to windmills to a literal box in the middle of a lake. Mangoe (talk) 19:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the slow reply, it's been an eventful day (I'm a custodian for a public school system, which just closed one of our schools due to a COVID outbreak). Anyway, using the Google Maps link, you can see that they show the communities exist.  Now, am I saying that one reference is enough?  Clearly not.  There should be waaay more references.  I just think that having the USGS, however clinky their identification process is (it is used across the entire project), that alone shouldn't be enough to delete these two pages.  I don't feel there is enough.  If there was, I would change my !vote, but I still see more than enough to keep these pages around. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 01:28 on October 17, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * Google Maps is getting its names from us and similar sources. It's not an independent source. And whatever one may think of the USGS as a whole, this particular project had a lot of issues, one of which was taking isolated railroad locations (most often passing sidings) and misidentifying them as "populated places", when the reality was that there had to be a station with a name for operational reasons, regardless of whether anyone lived nearby. I don't see evidence of a siding in this case (they usually show up on the topos) but I also don't have better evidence to suggest anything else than a named point on the railroad. Mangoe (talk) 04:33, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You didn't ping, so I didn't notice this was updated. West Virginia has a LOT of coal towns, so do a tad more research before writing anything off as just "a named point on the railroad."  As for Google getting it's names from Wikipedia and similar sources, I don't think so.  Look at any form of Google Maps or Google Earth and you will see OpenStreetMap and USGS copyrights at the bottom, along with Google's own copyright.  Nowhere is Wikipedia or Wikimedia listed unless you are using the Wikipedia addon on Google Earth.  I'm not changing my !vote. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 03:22 on October 20, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * Delete The WP:GNIS is not a reliable source, with many discrepancies with the USGS gazetteers, and even if it is/was in fact a "populated place", that is not the automatically same as a notable community. Locale (geographic) has a specific definition as used, and no, New York City is not a locale. Place names on Google Maps are imported in bulk from GNIS, and if you click the name and there is a Wikipedia article on it, that is imported into the sidebar. I see no evidence this is a coal town or anything else establishing notability. Reywas92Talk 04:15, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * GNIS is an essay, come on! Policies!  Locale, itself, is sourced by ONE! USGS source.  So, either the USGS is a crappy source or it's a reliable source.  It can't be both.  As for Aldridge not being a coal town, what "no evidence" did you see?  Cause I saw evidence.  Not great, but there was.  What we have here is WP:Cherrypicking (yes, another essay), but in this case this one counts.  You are picking the negative and excluding the positive, hoping no one will look and notice.  I looked. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 05:18 on October 21, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * The USGS place names gazetteer lists Aldridge as a "locale", defined this way on page 3, so I have no idea what you're getting on about: our locale (geographic) article is referring specifically to this definition. The USGS as an entity is generally a reliable source for contextual content, but the online GNIS as a database is not a reliable source with respect to its classifications. We have literally hundreds of examples, just a few of which are provided in this essay (if you have a specific line to challenge, say so rather than complaining about it being an essay), showing widespread inaccuaracies in the GNIS, falsely listing railroad junctions, ranches, crossings, and other sites in the "populated place" classification. Even for those correctly classified, this includes neighborhoods, subdivisions, mobile home parks, and other places which are not automatically notable. We require further sources beyond a context-free database to establish notability. You have provided none. Are you asking me to prove a negative or something? No, I have not seen any evidence this is a coal town. Reywas92Talk 05:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The GNIS is part of the USGS. So, my point is, you can't have a unreliable source within a reliable source.  It's either reliable or unreliable.  Not both.  Also, first line of "locale": "place at which there is or was human activity".  Which means, New York City can be considered a locale.  There is human activity in NYC, at least the last time I checked.  The WP:GNIS page is an essay, not a policy.  We don't delete pages according to essays.  The Locale (geographic) page itself uses the USGS as a source, which may or may not be reliable from WP:GNIS and your present arguement.  Still not changing my !vote. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 21:20 on October 21, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * "locale" and "populated place" are exclusive terms. If it qualifies as a populated place, it can't be a locale. Hog Farm Bacon 21:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * So, what is it populated with? Cows?  Last I checked, NYC was not populated with cows.  Though there was that one goat in Brooklyn, freakin' hipsters.  You are having a semantic arguement.  Locale says "place at which there is or was human activity".  Well, human activity can happen and it be a populated place too.  So, isn't a locale a populated place and a populated place a locale?  Yeah, sorry.  Your semantic arguement isn't working, it's just annoying. -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 00:37 on October 22, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * Please don't be rude, this isn't about semantics, it's merely following what the book source says. Aldridge is on page 8 of West Virginia Geographic Names, and it says "locale" under "Feature Class". On page 3, it defines this feature class as "place at which there is or was human activity: it does not include populated places (ppl)" because ppl is a different feature class for "populated place: place or area with scattered buildings and a permanent human population". The USGS defines these terms to be exclusive. This hardly matters because whether this is a place where people live or a locale by whatever definition, this is not automatic notability. Our guidelines indicate we need coverage about the place, and one line or entry showing the coordinates of a place name does not meet our notability requirements. Reywas92Talk 01:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Where was I rude? By calling people in Brooklyn hipsters?  Have you been to Brooklyn?  It's full of annoying hipsters.  That's not rude to you, that's rude to people in Brooklyn, specifically the hipsters...and if you are a hipster and live in or are from Brooklyn, I stand by my statement.  Now, where does it say "[t]he USGS defines these terms to be exclusive"?  You haven't shown me anything regarding that.  You also keep telling me that the USGS is a reliable source, but GNIS is a bad source (which is within the USGS).  So, notability would be found from the USGS source itself.  Plus, the links you just added above, would do for secondary sources.  So, technically, you have met GNG for us with a still very semantic arguement. :) -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 01:25 on October 22, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter
 * Oh my god, GNG requires "significant coverage" which this is not! Yes, it's right there on page 3 in the West Virginia Geographic Names definitions of feature classes: they define "locale" to exclude populated places because that's a different classification! - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reywas92 (talk • contribs)
 * I find it ironic to get called a hipster, as I was raised on a farm, and meet several of the You Might Be a Redneck If… criteria. Hog Farm Bacon 02:17, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I said "is full of annoying hipsters" and "if you are a hipster and live in or are from Brooklyn". Just don't be a hipster and we are good.  I live 70 miles from DC (ironically, about 20 miles south of Aldridge), and we have hipsters here....and cows (if you go five miles in any direction)!  Gotta go about 3 miles down a road from my house to find the pig farm. :)  Hipsters are pretentious and annoying.  Off topic, yes.  Worth the diversion, absolutely! -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 02:37 on October 22, 2020 (UTC) •  #WearAMask • #BlackLivesMatter


 * 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.