Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bloomington, South Dakota


 * 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 Userify. Will userify to User:TCMemoire/Bloomington, South Dakota after close; this article should not be returned to the mainspace without additional sources being added. Lankiveil (speak to me) 00:26, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Bloomington, South Dakota

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:V. The two sources are unreliable and no other source for the one-time existence or destruction of this town seems to exist. GNIS shows a Bloomington locale in South Dakota, but in Charles Mix County, not Clay County. In addition, Route 77 (off of which the sources claim the ghost town lies) hasn't existed in South Dakota since it was replaced by Interstate 29 in the 1960s. Brycehughes (talk) 10:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * (Apparently I made this article, although I have no recollection of doing so...) Now that I live closer to the site of the town, I could probably find better, book sources for it; but I won't be able to do so until January as I'm away. I'm seeing more results of mentions of it in other sources, but none of them particularly reliable. I'm seeing some books in my library database that could be helpful.  –  T C  Memoire  23:07, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Dakota-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:04, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:04, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If is interested in attempting to add improved refs at a later date, then the best solution would be to userfy the article in anticipation of that happening (assuming no suitable sources are found prior to the conclusion of the AFD discussion). This would preserve the article's history and text. Inclusion of reliably-sourced information not easily found in existing internet sources is something that should be encouraged. Antepenultimate (talk) 16:00, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree (as nom) with userfy suggestion, given 's consent. Brycehughes (talk) 00:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, I am willing userfy and source at a later date.  –  T C  Memoire  06:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Neutral but perhaps this can be figured out. It seems to have been a real town and pass WP:V.  This book about prohibition in South Dakota describes it as  a "frontier town" that apparently even had its own church.  There are references to a Bloomington in this book about the history of South Dakota. References in this book too.  The reason I didn't vote "keep" is these sources seem to indicate the town was far west of the location indicted in the article, more near Platte.  There doesn't seem to be a definitive history of this town seemingly available online.  Perhaps non-online sources have more. --Oakshade (talk) 07:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * That would be the Bloomington in Charles Mix County (see here), where Platte is located, and not the subject to the article, which was supposedly in Clay County. There is plenty of evidence for the Charles Mix County Bloomington, but seemingly none verifiable for the Bloomington under discussion here. Brycehughes (talk) 16:08, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 18:09, 19 December 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.