Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buttercup Creek


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 22:55, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Buttercup Creek

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I cannot find any sources beyond the article's photo to show this stream exists. GNIS searches turn up nothing, and Google searches turn up only wiki, wiki-mirrors or unrelated streams and housing developments outside of New York. Searching within the article's only reference (a dead link, but currently available here) does not turn up any results in NY. I'd really like to be proven wrong here, as WP:GEOLAND standards are rightfully low for geographic features, but I can find nothing - except for the picture with the sign, which I guess at least proves this is not a hoax.

In fairness, the article creator (who did not edit except to create this article in May of this year) contested a speedy by saying: ''This page should not be speedily deleted because... The creek is fed from a cold spring which reduces the temperature of the waters downstream to allow the trout to spawn. It is the only known spring fed tributary of the important kinderhook creek, hence having more than ordinary significance''.

If sources are found, I would support keeping or merging the content to Kinderhook Creek, which this stream claims to be tributary to. Antepenultimate (talk) 00:48, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: If deletion is supported, I wouldn't mind if the article was moved to my userspace in case I can locate offline sources at a later date. Antepenultimate (talk) 01:14, 7 October 2016 (UTC) Given new information about the stream's dimensions revealed below, I doubt this would ever be a subject needing its own article. Antepenultimate (talk) 22:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment I found Gifford road in Canaan on Google Maps, and it is very short and only crosses one creek on that map which was unnamed. Assuming it was Buttercup Creek, it is a tributary of Stony Kill which is a tributary of Kinderhook Creek.  (Note that Stony Kill Falls is located on a different Stony Kill, but also in NY State.)  That it drains into Stony Kill (not Kinderhook Creek) is stated in Canaan, New York also.  I also found this creek on a USGS topo map [] and that map doesn't show a name either.  It looks to be about .75 mile in length - no wonder it doesn't have a widely recognized name. MB 05:33, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I also used the interactive NYS DEC mapping tool (the one reference in the article) and found it is indeed classified as C(T) as indicated in the article. This map also showed no name, just a blue line.  Have not found any other sources and conclude this stream is too small to be notable.  Other than this entry in a database of all water bodies in the state of NY, can't find any map with it's name or any other reference. MB 15:52, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to piece all of this together, it's a much clearer picture thanks to what you've found. Searching for the road in order to find the stream was very clever. Given that this seems to be an extremely minor stream, I'm striking my request to userfy as it seems that this subject could be adequately and briefly covered as part of a downstream article (if anything identifying it by name is ever found, that is). Antepenultimate (talk) 22:12, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment Whaddya know, I actually found something, though it changes little. The name "Buttercup Creek" is currently a proposed name for the stream, having been submitted to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names for review sometime before June of this year. See pages 12 & 13 of this document. It confirms that the naming is intended to refer to the Caltha growing on its banks, FWIW. Also interesting: the proposal summary, in assessing usage, notes that "The name Buttercup Creek is the subject of a short entry in Wikipedia, although there is no information to suggest it is in local use". Citogenesis in action! Nevertheless, the stream is still officially unnamed, and even if adopted, I still feel it best to include any information about this stream in an existing article for a larger stream fed by it. Antepenultimate (talk) 01:59, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Very interesting - good find. So it's actually 1.5 miles long. Where I grew up, there were many big ravines with little tiny creeks at the bottom and all were unnamed.  If the name makes it into the GNIS, someone may recreate this article.  But for now, I'm sticking with delete because it is one of thousands of short, tiny, and un-notable waterways. Hey,  I just realized we crossed paths a couple of months ago when you improved West Canada Creek. MB 02:54, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I recognized your sig, and I was glad to see someone who may have more local familiarity with the area take an interest in this deletion discussion (I really don't much care for deletion of geo features, in general - I was pretty reluctant to start this one). Good to see you! Antepenultimate (talk) 15:22, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge to Kinderhook Creek, probably to its "Tributaries" section. -- do ncr  am  03:52, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nordic   Nightfury  07:43, 25 October 2016 (UTC)


 * delete fails GNG by a mile. why is there a picture of a ditch in this article?? Jytdog (talk) 08:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete No RS indication of existance or use of the name. Earlier comment about proposal to name the ditch is good evidence it is not a recognized, named feature. J bh  Talk  15:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Although I lean towards keeping geo articles, this one seems to be a minor stream with no official name on any map. There is no coverage which can help us write an article and the concerns about potentially serving as a WP:CIRCULAR source of information makes me go with a delete. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:02, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment, for the purpose of clarity since I raised the possibility of supporting a merger in my nomination - as no reliable sources using this name have been found, and all evidence points to there being none currently in existence (per the USBGN, noted above) - I would argue against a merger. There simply is no sourced information to merge. Antepenultimate (talk) 23:51, 1 November 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.