Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cucamonga Junction, 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 draftify. The consensus is that this article is non-notable, leading to a delete conclusion. However, IveGoneAway is interested in working on the article and finding more sources that are not yet immediately available, so I am invoking IAR to draftify it rather than making them go through the WP:REFUND process and it can go through AfC if/when the necessary sources exist. Legoktm (talk) 01:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Cucamonga Junction, Arizona

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Sourcing from a Forest Service map is always a bad sign on GNIS, and this is not an exception. I can find nothing at all about this place other than that someone set a novel in this place. Since it was published in 2019, it's not at all unlikely that all the author knew about it came from Wikipedia. The topos and aerials are little help, as they aren't that old, but they show nothing but a huge array of mines until the name just starts appearing on the maps in the 1990s, probably copied there from GNIS. It's possible this is a misplaced rail spot, as there is a line not far north, but again, I can't find any verification. Mangoe (talk) 03:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Arizona. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 08:04, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. This was a formerly mined locale which is mentioned in a 1988 US Forest Service book, but as a 25-acre mining site, not a community. There was never a community here; zero results on Newspaper Archive, no mention in Cram's Modern Atlas or other reference books. Firsfron of Ronchester  13:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep, for a while yet at least That is actually not a small quarry, I have seen historic villages with smaller quarries. 25 acres? The quarrying activity extends along the Santa Fe tracks for over 10 miles.  I do not know yet what was mined, but I could find out without too much trouble (first guess, Fort Hays Limestone for cement, which means there would have been a community) . Oh, it's flagstone .  There is still activity at some of the quarries, possibly just for aggregate and recreation.
 * There was a wye junction at the given coordinates, the possibility is that there was a division point there, or at least a water stop, the limestone being an aquifer. (I could find out).
 * There is a book about a real Cucamonga Junction, Arizona, on the Santa Fe line and on Route 66 (I could find out if this is the place). It is plausible that the coordinates were set by the OP on the quarry rather than the town site.
 * There are old foundations northwest of the OP's coordinates nest to the tracks, near the old wye junction on a bend of Forest Road 124.
 * It might be a rail fan site. (Fan photo near the given location is stated as Cucamonga Junction).
 * The 1986 National Gazetteer lists a Cucamonga Junction near those coordinates.
 * I would next try my own newspaper search, if we don't delete it.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 19:35, 10 November 2022 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, the Bohan book is described as placing the old town on the Santa Fe Railroad and on Route 66 and near a Harvey House. But, the coordinate place the site on a Santa Fe line that did not exist until the 1950s.
 * An alternate location would be a rail junction close to Ash Fork.
 * The Santa Fe, Prescott and Phoenix Railway had a terminus Junction just east of Ash Fork. (I can just make out the "Peavine" junction just on the east edge of Ash Fork.)
 * But just north of the town is another abandoned rail junction and yard. This railroad is clearly the present-day route of the DoubleA Ranch Road (FR 124) that McGivney describes as passing what locals say is the Cucamonga Junction site.
 * At a minimum, this railroad hauled Ash Fork's famous flagstone from the quarries back to town and a number of spurs into the quarries can be identified.
 * Clearly, the 1950s Santa Fe realignment paralleled the quarry track north of the quarries.
 * I now have a number to call for the active qarry, and there are topos, railroad galleries, and geological maps yet to be consulted.
 * So, I think there is something to research and write about here.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 17:09, 11 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete Besides the Arizona Highways article that refers to the ruins of an old mining town, there is not much else. Searching newspapers.com finds one article that talks about buying stone from the quarries at C.J. Not enough to establish that it was a populated place. MB 04:05, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * If you look, you see that that stone you mention is the present day Ash Fork community's identity.
 * There is a "wide spot on the tracks" where McGivney said there is.
 * The Bohan book has some reason to take its title from whatever was at the quarry.
 * Give me a chance to make a few calls to dig into offline sources, but if it is just local knowledge, I would recommend merge over delete. IveGoneAway (talk) 03:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC) IveGoneAway (talk) 05:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't get me wrong, I understand the possibility that there was no settlement for housing of the flagstone quarry workers, but there is the possibility that there was, and I am foolish enough to chase down the locals about it. There were human stuctures there at a rail siding and a grade down to the realigned ATSF track, (but not where present maps put the pin) but given what they were digging up, there was no reason as I see it for the structures to be rock processing structures (like ore mills).
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 13:38, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Every place with human-built structures is not a settlement that qualifies for an article, even if people slept there - work camps are not towns. MB 13:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I get that, the working observation is that there was rail line from Ash Fork to the putative "Cucamonga Junction", and that when ATSF realigned its mainline to run parallel to the site, it set a junction to the site (further obsoleting the line to Ash Fork) and BNSF still maintains a siding there. At a minimum, this would be industrial history for Ash Fork, and is of interest and I will probably continue the plan of contacting local historians. IveGoneAway (talk) 14:18, 14 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I just talked with their Historic Society, "Oh, yeah, that's in the rail section!" They will look up what they have and email me.
 * When I can sneak it in, I will contact the quarry and the DoubleA Ranch.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: I'm willing to relist this once as research is still going on trying to establish whether or not there was a town at this location. But this closure won't be delayed indefinitely. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:56, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if we don't eventually connect with citations for a settlement, that doesn't mean there isn't other notabilty to cite in some way. Quarries and Beyond reports about 10 companies operating roughly 20 active quarries here in 2000. Given that the only other industry going on here is the DoubleA cattle and serial Route 66 museum, that's not pocket change. And the location is a scenic railfan site (Walthers and Trains have done shoots there) ; it is the crest of a grade in a beautiful road cut a convenient 10 miles off of an Interstate. This one of many railfan videos at the site incidentally shows the "Cucamonga Junction" site on DoubleA Ranch Road (upper right) that McGivney mentioned.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 05:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I would appreciate that, but, I am not familiar with the significance or process of "relist". Honestly, I have been holding back as a delete discussion page did not seem the proper venue for a daily report on progress on notability. Forestry service sources might not be entirely unimportant as they counted over 200 limestone and flagstone quarries on that ridge. Ike Yost built a much shorter-lived ghost town for just one small quarry. The present site is the heart of the community 10 miles to the south; all of the abandoned railroad right-of-way surrounding Ash Fork is today covered with pallets of Kiabib and Coconino construction stone. I have local contacts to work through, and books to buy or borrow, but that will take some time.
 * Assuming this is consistent with "relisting", I propose copying the above links with other citations I am building to Talk:Cucamonga Junction, Arizona, and continuing working there. I am open to the eventual range of disposition (delete/keep/move/merge) depending on findings.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 00:39, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I have started a sandbox for developing citations for the topic. Please, add it to your watch list if you are interested in the AfD.
 * I have found the 1962 topo that locates the church and dozens of stuctures in between the quarries. Later maps that just show the place name generally pin it to the locaton of the Calvary Baptist church. I would like to upload an image of that map. Screen clippings of a US government website displaying US government publications should be safe to upload to Commons, am I correct?
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 16:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC) 22:04, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

 Addressing the points of the original poster of the delete tag. (See citations here)
 * "Sourcing from a Forest Service map is always a bad sign on GNIS, and this is not an exception."

The boldness of that statement is what prompted me to look into this.
 * "I can find nothing at all about this place other than that someone set a novel in this place. Since it was published in 2019, it's not at all unlikely that all the author knew about it came from Wikipedia." 

​Maybe he got everything in the book from WP, maybe he didn't; I was not going to pre-judge. Just reading the liner, it is clear that Ash Fork fits the description, but anonymised under the insider's name for the hill-folk "cutter" families living in 1975 without plumbing or electricity.

Presumptions aside, what we know about the author from profiles (in his books) is that he and his family spent 15 years off the grid in the waterless Arizona high desert (Kaibab is high dessert), starting with 18 months in a tent in a place not unlike Cucamonga Junction. I haven't found out yet where they actually lived, but it is presumptous to assume that it could not possibly be somewhere around Ash Fork. Maybe the book to read is not Cucamonga Junction, but Living on the Edge, which with any luck would tell us where they lived.

The book does not "document" the quarry community, but it is an interesting reflection. Bohan moved his four boys to Arizona in the early 90s. Coincidentally, a male Bohan graduated from Ash Fork in 1998. I could look into this.


 * "The topos and aerials are little help, as they aren't that old, ..."

The topos actually show quite a bit. They schematically illustrate almost a century of history for the settlement.

Today's aerials show abbandoned foundations in the Cucamonga Junction area, and really none in the decades younger quarries to the west.

The 1962 topo shows the dozens of structures and the church, Cavalry Baptist. The Arizona Republic profiled the community in 1963.


 * "... but they show nothing but a huge array of mines until the name just starts appearing on the maps in the 1990s, probably copied there from GNIS."

The GNIS point seems centered on the church, now gone, or the road junction.

Railfans used the name "Cucamonga" for the train-chasing road in the early 60s.


 * " It's possible this is a misplaced rail spot, as there is a line not far north, but again, I can't find any verification."

The Crookton Cutoff was completed in 1960, and even though the line is right up against some abandoned foundations, the locals say there never was any siding at Cucamonga Junction. Neither was there any quarry railroad.

So, it is not a misplaced rail spot, it is a location pinned on a church wedged in at the junction of the roads to Williams, Corva Station and DoubleA Ranch

I vote Keep. Even though the place could be claimed by Ash Fork, it has been connected also with Williams and Corva. The quarry community was under a different county juristition than Ash Fork and the children were in the Williams School district. In 1960, the best road was to Williams, and today the road to Williams is two miles shorter than to Ash fork.

I would like to proceed with getting the books and interviewing the octagenarian witnesses with the knowlege that you all are willing to keep the page.

IveGoneAway (talk) 03:46, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello, IveGoneAway, while you are free to comment, you have already "voted" Keep above so I have stricken your second vote. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 05:04, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:05, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

OK, thanks, I have just figured the process of relisting (wow, 7 days). OK, it does not mean revoting. However, I also meant to clarify my qualifiers for "keep" have changed from "maybe there is something here" to "I think there is enough here for an DYK expansion" (in case I wasn't wearing that on my sleave already), which is why I want to work on the article in sandbox due to the expansion requirements for DYK, a months-long process for me at best.

However, it just so happens that all of the present and pending contacts are observing a family holiday until Monday, probably. And I don't want to be any more of a pest.

Sorry for any "Fight me, mate!" tone.

IveGoneAway (talk) 19:29, 23 November 2022 (UTC) 22:15, 23 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Just when I was telling someone that I had learned how to spell "Cucamonga", this is published:


 * In the previewed text, the early 1950s route to "Kukamunga Junction" from Ash Fork is through Corva Station, agreeing with the history presented in the Topos.
 * Today, I order Living on the Edge, Cucamonga Junction and Kukamunga Junction. Yikes! Delivery is a week!
 * Today, I order Living on the Edge, Cucamonga Junction and Kukamunga Junction. Yikes! Delivery is a week!


 * Re. WP:GEOLAND Populated places without legal recognition,
 * It was a real populated place (even if we speculate that the NSF made up the name sometime before 1950)
 * Then there is the question of notability. If we were to compose a list of flagstone quarries in North Arizona, the list would be Cucamonga Junction. The term "rock doodler" is largely (surprisingly) restricted to this locality, and the community is mentioned in the neighboring towns repeatedly prior to 1960 (residences demolished by 1974 (Ashley, 2022)) for its importance to the economy and the distinctiveness of its demographic and peculiar labor arrangement. It is a particular case for a US community living though the 1960s without basic utilities.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: The book you mention is self-published. Every apostrophe has somehow become a comma. Reading though, I see misspelled words and phrases like "batterry", "leniet", "Violence Against Womens Act", etc. This is not a Reliable Source, and the timing of this book's publication is very strange. This needs more eyes. I'm pinging recent geography AFD closers., , or I don't have enough time to follow up this week.   Firsfron of Ronchester  05:36, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * " timing of this book's publication is very strange" I suppose, I mean that aspect is ironic to me. I get your point about it being poor grammar; I guess that is an aspect of self-published. I have questioned to myself the ability to recall such childhood details after almost 70 years (the cardinal directions that she gives for the drive to Corva don't jive at first blush, but I actually haven't tried yet to to follow them turn by turn). I am willing to look at the whole book, the impression from the available previews is that the author recently visited the site. They are familiar with the roads, but I guess they could have gotten that information from my list of topos and clippings? She starts a description from the church, but I think I have two RS on the existence of the church, plus an email from the historical society staff that introduce me to the existence of the church.  This reflects an issue I already worried over, living witnesses of the 1950s community are rapidly passing on.  I was interested in looking at the books and comparing their statements with what I have found.
 * But, yes, the book could be a fiction if that what is being suggested. I guess could be prone to being duped. Please, let me know how to best cooperate. IveGoneAway (talk) 16:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)


 * The Ash Fork Historical Society wants to look at the Ashley book. I feel that I should disclose your concerns to them. Could you please be more specific about your suspicions as I should relay to them? What would you wish them to know? Autobiographies are something I would assume they are experienced in examining. I appreciate the raising of RS, as I am not used to working with autobiographical sources, in this case autobiographical sources as witnesses to the existence of the community -- please see the WP:RS bullet below.
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 05:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * eeeeeeh, Getty images.  IveGoneAway (talk) 06:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

This afternoon I had a good phone conversation with David Cox, cited by Heide Branndes of Route Magazine. David has been the minister of the First Southern Baptist Church of Ash Fork since the 80s. "Oh, yes, absolutely a real place!" David said there were 200-300 people up there before the Forest Service moved them out. The Cucamonga Junction church was one of two missions established by his Ash Fork Southern Baptist church. Thanks to Mr. Cox, I can talk with Fayrene Hume later this week.

IveGoneAway (talk) 23:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Re WP:RS : My focus has been on the Delete reason, "There was never a community here".
 * There was a community there, from multiple sources, but I have no intent or desire to use a continuous source. I want to expand the article. But, you should be able to see that when I expand articles, I hope to have the citations run as long as the article. From my experience, this sort of expansion can take months to years, but I would like to know that you can accept that there was a community here and not delete the page. You are not the only one short on time (Sorry if that is drama, Liz).
 * The topos are RS, maybe? 1962 topo shows a community. The 1980s topos show removal. Multiple sources (not all RS, true) say the removal happened in the 1970s.
 * I have a newspaper giving an estimate of the population with corroboration from an an independent witness by a recognized authority, and I am working on a lead on a third corroboration. I don't see in WP:RS how interviews of witnesses are considered, even if they are recognized experts.
 * Clearly, part of the expansion would be clearing the sources with you all, examples:
 * Is David Cox RS? Even if he is, I hope to see if he can produce church records of the existence of the community and its church. My idea now with Mr. Cox is to ask him if he has church records about their mission if that is necessary. But am I pestering him over a page that will be deleted?
 * The Catholic church also provided aid to the community, but I would try to access printed records for the expansion.
 * Kayrene Hume is considered the most respected source. I would need advice on how or if I even may cite her. It occurs to me it may be problematic for a Wikipedian to cite an interview that they conducted! Is that OR?
 * I would think that Marshall Trimble would be a state-recognized authority. I should be able to manage contact with him now.
 * Charlotte Madison was a witness to the community for nearly 20 years. But the records of her witness are largely autobiographical, and her blog post witness to the existence of Cucamonga Junction has the problem of being a blog post. I could get her books, for the purpose of witness to the community (and living conditions), but her books are autobiographical, and probably self-published.  Would recognition by the Ash Fork Historical Society lend reliability?
 * Is WP:RS silent on autobiography? Or do the same rules apply?
 * Is the Ash Fork Historical Society or members thereof RS? Or are they presumed Ash Fork boosters and not independent?
 * Too much for now. IveGoneAway (talk) 06:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment I don't know how to process all of this information that turned into a pretty one-sided discussion. IveGoneAway, you do realize that personal telephone calls can't be used to establish notability, right? They aren't reliable, secondary, independent sources. You are getting too far down into the weeds here. If this article survives, it can never contain the level of detail you are proposing. This is an encyclopedia, not a county historical journal. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 05:14, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I have asked questions of you and the other reviewers. I asked these questions of RS; "Is David Cox RS?" and "problematic for a Wikipedian to cite an interview that they conducted". I have arranged to contact the most knowledgedable on the person on the topic today, and I do have concerns as I stated above. Thank you very much for the truely valuable response. It would hope that it would be apparent that in asking these questions that I am not confident the usabilty of the calls, and express that I am working towards needing in-print RS, with no intent of having them to go out a write something, but find to find records if they exist.
 * But, that takes time. You have been helpful and very patient. The problem for me has been the rolling time limit for relisting, promting me to accelerate efforts, including day by day postings that become tl:dr. This is my first time working under a relist and I sincerely don't think it has been fair to you ask you to bump the relist week by week. Perhaps it would have been a better suggestion to Draftify the page (which I have worked through before at a more natural pace), or to suggest letting the delete progess and after I have solidified the RS citations then "Request for article" (sorry, I don't remember the name for the WP).
 * Thank you
 * IveGoneAway (talk) 15:00, 30 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete The consensus established in 2007 was there must be community there to have an article. If its an old mining sites, then its non-notable. Sites that held a village or a town and were then abandonded are non-notable.   scope_creep Talk  17:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.