Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beecher Creek


 * 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. I find the nomination, and then the comment at 06:30, 18 December 2021 (UTC), especially persuasive. I note the opposition to establishing a redirect which appears to have a valid rationale also, hence Delete rather than Redirect or Merge. Daniel (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Beecher Creek

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

Unreferenced since 2006, and my WP:BEFORE turned up only a bare mention in a CBC story and another bare mention in a book about urban legends of the railways of British Columbia. Lots of coverage of other streams called Beecher Creek though (e.g., in New York state). I think a lot of people have looked at this page and thought "there must be sources" but in the end this is just a small stream in a remote area of BC. Fails WP:NGEO/WP:GNG, lack of multiple instances of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. We don't host articles on geographical features just because they exist, because Wikipedia is not a gazetteer. FOARP (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2021 (UTC) Delete i've searched before on this one but i found nothing even through paid searches.Timur9008 (talk) 13:56, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:37, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:37, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep The idea this needs to meet GNG is incorrect, as GEOLAND states "Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist." That's true here - there have been at least three research articles on the creek, and even if it's not kept could be up-merged to the park, an article which both appears notable and needs work. SportingFlyer  T · C  13:27, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Also per WP:GEOLAND - "The number of known sources should be considered to ensure there is enough verifiable content for an encyclopedic article". Can you give us some links to the research articles on the creek? JSTOR only mentions the creek in New York State. FOARP (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Active streamkeeper group: ; Can't access this one: ; two masters theses ; mentioned here: Whistle Posts West: Railway Tales from British Columbia, Alberta, and Yukon, at Sunken Engine Creek (link didn't seem to work); a Burnaby map claims it was named after Jimmy Beecher; see also City of Burnaby Holdom Station Area Guide, 2003. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:46, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Master’s theses (and in this case, master’s projects) aren’t RS per WP:SCHOLARSHIP. The book you’re talking about is the same urban legends book I linked to in the nom. The association is a club-website, not RS. Maps don’t indicate notability per wp:NGEO. There’s a reason why this has been unreferenced since 2006. FOARP (talk) 06:30, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle (talk • contribs) 21:08, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: If not kept, just redirect/merge into Still Creek.--Milowent • hasspoken  17:31, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment - This article is unsourced since 2006 and no actual reliable sourcing has been produced (a club website is not a reliable source, Master's theses aren't reliable sources per WP:SCHOLARSHIP, a book on urban legends that barely mentions the creek is not significant coverage, a map is not significant coverage). I can accept redirecting to Still Creek per Milowent but there really just isn't any actual notability here. FOARP (talk) 22:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Still Creek. There aren't sufficient sources for it to pass WP:GNG but it's a potential search term. Suonii180 (talk) 01:51, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Suonii180 - It's a potential search term, but is the person searching the term likely to be looking for this creek? There is a creek in New York state with the same name, also discussed in a number of our articles (e.g., Copeland Bridge, Sacandaga River). Similarly both there is both a Beecher Creek and a Little Beecher Creek in our list of rivers in Oregon. Why does a redirect to Still Creek make sense? Like I said, I can accept redirecting, but my preference is for deletion. FOARP (talk) 09:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not against deleting if redirecting might cause confusion for people searching for the term. Suonii180 (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2022 (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.