Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boyer Rocks


 * 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 keep. ✗ plicit  01:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Boyer Rocks

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Small rock mass produced from GNIS, about which nothing is described beyond mere existence, fails WP:GEOLAND Reywas92Talk 17:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Reywas92Talk 17:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Antarctica-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:50, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep/Merge Encyclopedic content worth preserving; as Antarctica lacks the extensive and dominant human-made infrastructure that other world regions possess, one might presume that if an Antarctic nature feature is notable enough to get named then it is notable enough to appear in Wikipedia. Apcbg (talk) 12:03, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * What the heck does "notable enough to get named" mean? "It has a name" is NOT our standard of notability (WP:GEOLAND), no matter where in the world it is. The GNIS actually only gives its location imprecisely as -63.583333, -59, which is empty ocean, so we don't even know which of these scores of tiny, nondescript rocks they are! Nor is it necessarily worth mentioning a tiny, nondescript rock on some other article merely because it exists. Reywas92Talk 18:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The precise coordinates of Boyer Rocks are 63°34′59″S 59°01′59″W according to the linked reliable source, UK Antarctic Place-names Committee. Apcbg (talk) 07:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep This feature seems to just pass WP:GEOLAND as it has been referred to in multiple published geological references , and has information beyond just "statistics and a name" (the sources include the name origin). Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep As per above, it should pass for WP:GEOLAND as per covered in geo related sources. It has coverage in which seems good enough to qualify WP:GEOLAND.  Grandruskiy48  • Talk∕Contribs 16:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:GEOLAND as per WP:RS available. Rickshaw Takahashi (talk) 16:23, 22 June 2021 (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.