Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bentworth Stream


 * 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  10:08, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Bentworth Stream

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no evidence that such a waterway exists SovalValtos (talk) 18:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    19:37, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. North America1000 20:38, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

The entry for The Villager magazine for March 2013 states that Bentworth had its own river. I had the issue but lost it, and the it's recently been taken offline. Are you local? There are still long ditches alongside every road in the village that leads up to two water stations from where it got drained in the 1980s. If the March 2013 issue hadn't of got taken down then I doubt this discussion for deletion would be happening. I'm going to try and find some sources, then. The water stations would be a good start. JAG UAR   21:59, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * A request for reliable sources for its existence was made over a month ago on the article talk page. None have been forthcoming. No map has been found that shows it, no mention in historical documents, no mention of it being drained in the 1980s, no mentions of fishing, mills, boat traffic etc. I do not doubt the statement by User:Jaguar that the copy of "The Villager" magazine mentioned had a reference to a river, but a magazine piece in a Parish magazine would not be a reliable source. Even if there was someone local to look into the ditches that drain the roads in the village I see no point, as that would be OR. Surely it is best to delete the article now? SovalValtos (talk) 11:12, 18 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. SovalValtos has made all the points there are to be made here, there are zero sources available to verify subject. Yes, this discussion should have taken place even if that local magazine was online or was available in print. The lack of other sources more than suggest that this could be a hoax or the name is simply made up. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 23:06, 22 October 2015 (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.