Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cosnino, Arizona


 * 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 speedy keep. Being bold and doing a speedy close early. Missvain (talk) 20:18, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Cosnino, Arizona

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails GNG due to lack of significant coverage. No evidence that this is or was a notable populated place. Sources in the History section mention Cosnino as a landmark but do not place any significance on the location itself. (Split from previous batch AfD) –dlthewave ☎ 16:18, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 16:18, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 16:18, 13 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Easily passes WP:GEOLAND #1 (and WP:GNG as well, even though that's not the test for populated places.) There's lots of newspaper articles on the community on newspapers.com. SportingFlyer  T · C  23:54, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep While it's also listed as a city on older highway maps that I have physical copies of, Cosnino has appeared in the news as recently as four days ago. An earlier article about the same incident explicitly describes its location. Here's another story from the past week, this one fortunately not about murder, which describes a different couple living in Cosnino. There was another murder there in 2012 (and believe me, I wish I could cite more positive news). And that's without even getting into the older news links that SportingFlyer found, which don't turn up easily on Google. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 05:11, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Cosnino, Arizona First nomination for deletion. Was a Speedy Keep, nomination withdrawn. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 13:13, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:03, 14 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep meets GEOLAND and is still being mentioned in the news. -DJSasso (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:40, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:GEOLAND. It is a real, and populated place, and is receiving news mentions. Part of a large batch of poorly BEFORE'd articles. CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:44, 14 January 2020 (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.