Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Binney Junction, California


 * 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. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 00:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Binney Junction, California

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is almost accurate. but Binney Junction is not "an unincorporated community [...] at the junction of the Western Pacific and Southern Pacific Railroads"; it is the junction itself, which has, as far back as I can trace, always sat right at the edge of Maryville. There has never been a separate community around it. As far as the junction itself is concerned, it gets exactly the usual hits for a spot on the rail, so unless someone else can find something, I have to say that it isn't a notable junction.

This case is so obviously wrong (in the sense that anyone looking at a map or an aerial can see that there's no community here) that I went at looked at the USGS list of "feature class definitions", where I discovered a major omission: they have no class specifically for points on a railroad. It looks as though the list was compiled without awareness that every passing siding has a name, no matter how isolated it has; and indeed every place where two through tracks meet has a name, even just the ends of a passing siding. Therefore all these junctions and sidings get listed as "populated places", regardless of whether there was ever any surrounding population. I had figured that these spots were merely isolated errors; I had not guessed that there was a systematic fault in their system. At any rate, these rail points should never have been described in WP as "unincorporated communities". Mangoe (talk) 15:22, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:27, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:27, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete There is the GNIS "crossing" class that this would belong in, and sidings are included as locales; the wording of the definitions is just out of order. There's clearly a systematic fault as we see inconsistencies between the National Gazetteer books with tabulated GNIS and the online GNIS. Anyway, we can probably try to PROD these now too. Reywas92Talk 18:31, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Mail was addressed to Binney Junction at one point historically and then delivered to Marysville. and  showing it was named after A.J. Binney. Used as recently as 2007 in the newspaper.  We need to at the very least merge this to Marysville. SportingFlyer  T · C  23:08, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't appear to be "officially recognized", doesn't meet GNG. The facts that is was named after someone and was used as a railway landmmark do not mean that it is notable. –dlthewave ☎ 12:31, 21 April 2020 (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.