Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Champion 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The result was   Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) RadioFan (talk) 03:50, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Champion Creek

 * – ( View AfD View log )

contested prod. Lacks coverage in 3rd party sources. On reference I'm finding is a single insignificant mention in a directory of ghost towns. No other hits in Google Books or Google search. Several hits on an unrelated site in Colorado. RadioFan (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, article had a valid citation and I've added a history section. Nomination seems to be on no better grounds than "I've never heard of it." Yworo (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment The Doukhobor Genealogy Website reference is a bit concerning and appears to be self published, can you expand on how you feel this is a reliable sources and helps establish notability here? Perhaps this would be best merged to West Kootenay where notability is not a concern.--RadioFan (talk) 23:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Notable award-winning writer and historian. You're a bit quick on the trigger. I had no knowledge of this subject and found this material rather quickly. Yworo (talk) 23:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * comment how do you see this article expanding? If you see this expanding into a detailed multisectioned article based on numerous sources (more than a directory entry in a book and a single map on a geneology website, then great, I look forward to reading the improved article.  If not, can we agree on a merge to West Kootenay. --RadioFan (talk) 23:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That would be counter to the goals of WikiProject Ghost towns, which has a standard outline of how the article should be expanded, including sections on Geography and Demographics. The article does need to be moved to comply with the projects naming guidelines. Length of article is not an issue. Clearly the subject is covered by an in-depth historical sources as the appropriate newspaper article in the series could be added, and there are obviously offline sources that were used by Kalmakoff for his research. Notability has been shown and there is no further need to discuss deleting or merging the article. Yworo (talk) 23:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Two adequate refs provided, notable enough for me. Let's not use Google as a notability detector here.  The Doukhobor element means there is probably even more sources out there than your average ghost town.  This could end up expanded, but even if it doesn't, we don't arbitrarily delete/merge stubs.  The Interior  (Talk) 00:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per: Basque Garnet (1982), British Columbia Ghost Town Atlas, Sunfire Publications Limited,, . Wikipedia also functions as a gazeteer, and this is a useful entry for Wikipedia to retain. Northamerica1000 (talk) 02:32, 9 January 2012 (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.