Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Borehole 10-x


 * 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 redirect to Oak Island.  Sandstein  21:02, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Borehole 10-x

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG & WP:GEOFEAT. A single excavation done in 1970 on Oak Island by Triton Alliance, a non-notable business group. Content could possibly be merged into Oak Island and/or related articles if more reliable sources are found. Shearonink (talk) 15:48, 8 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment The potential notability of this borehole certainly relates to the part of the article that discusses lost treasure and pseudoscience, and the borehole is particularly prominently featured in the television series The Curse of Oak Island. The borehole has certainly achieved more notability than what is obvious from the characterization above. However, that doesn't necessarily mean there needs to be a separate article about it. As the nominator says, it may be preferable to collect information about this legend into fewer articles rather than having separate articles about individual elements of the story. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: When I first came upon this article the thing that kind of struck me funny was that the borehole has an article but the group that created it does not... Per WP:GNG it doesn't appear that this individual man-made feature on Oak Island has had independent, multiple reliable sources assessing/describing it in detail, delineating its notability as it relates to Oak Island, etc. Merging the present content into the parent article of Oak Island would preserve the content & sources. Shearonink (talk) 22:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep For why the bore was made and pseudoscience, etc., not the bore hole itself.  But it does need much better referencing. Aoziwe (talk) 11:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:39, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect  to Oak Island, where it seems adequately discussed. I can see the point of a redirect, but there is no reason for a separate article.  DGG ( talk ) 17:51, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nova Scotia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:13, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: DGG's solution above seems very fair to me, agree that there is no need for a separate article. Shearonink (talk) 16:59, 22 February 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.