Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aristocrat Trailer Park


 * 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.  Sandstein  06:26, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Aristocrat Trailer Park

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable; fails WP:GEOLAND. Individual trailer-parks are not inherently notable. Listing in the USGS Geographic Names Information System is not automatic justification for article. A trailer-park or any neighborhood within a city/town needs to be independently notable. This one is not. See Articles for deletion/A-1 Trailer Park, Arizona for similar discussion. MB 22:45, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:25, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:26, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - Per WP:GEOLAND: "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low." By definition, the USGS designation is legal recognition of the place. And the USGS listing gives the location the definition of a "populated place". There is nothing, as the nominator claims, in Geoland which says that a populated place which meets the main requirement of Geoland must also show independent notability if it is located within a city/town.  Onel 5969  TT me 21:06, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete upon inspection, these all appear to be non-notable neighbourhoods within recognized communities where you can park a mobile home. GEOLAND does not automatically confer notability, therefore. GEOLAND is expressly not a carte blanche for every subdivision. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:42, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. First, this appears not to exist any more or is so small only to have had two visitors tagged in facebook. I can't find any reliable sources this still exists. As such, it fails my standards for subdivisions. Bearian (talk) 19:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- a non notable sub-divisions. I cannot find any secondary sources on it. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:14, 26 August 2016 (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.