Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glen Pean powerline span


 * 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. Possibly a hoax, but regardless not notable. RL0919 (talk) 06:18, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Glen Pean powerline span

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsufficient evidence that this exists

As was noted on the talk page in 2012, there are sufficient reasons to doubt the existence of this power line. I have been unable to find the cited source online, but it is presumably something like this.. Verbcatcher (talk) 03:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The Ordnance Survey map does not show a power line at these coordinates or over Glen Pean, although these maps normally shows major power lines.
 * No pylons are visible at these coordinates with Google Maps Satellite View, nor with Bing Maps Aerial View.
 * The specified coordinates are not in Glen Pean but are in Gleann an Obain Bhig, on the other side of a pass.
 * Its existence has been challenged in a blog posting.[Blacklisted link on talk page]
 * A Google search for "Glen Pean powerline span" appears to give no evidence that this exists, other than numerous Wikipedia-derived pages.


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Verbcatcher (talk) 03:25, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 11:40, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:V. There is a map on page 18 of this document which shows the only two lines in the area are from Fort Augustus to both Sky and Fort William, neither of which traverses the area in question. These lines are also viewble on Google satellite (e.g. here) and can be easily traced from their origin. Pontificalibus 06:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I was unable to verify this, and more importantly since such man made structures do not have presume notability - my inability to verify this convinced me that it does not pass GNG. Icewhiz (talk) 11:44, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned in the archived version from 2009but nothing in the current version. It could be something that did exist but doesn't now or more likely an error in the data. The list isn't evidence that the structure existed as there is also a building described as "Preston Mosque" in the 2009 list but I don't think there was ever a mosque or a building of that height at that location. Peter James (talk) 15:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete (after ec). The cited source ENR5.4 AIR NAVIGATION OBSTACLES (you may need to login to see this, in which case you will need to supply a pilot license number) has only one section, "Mountains and Hills with Warning Lights", and none of them are in Scotland. So this is either a hoax, or the line once did exist, but was demolished and replaced with new lines to Skye.  It would be unusual for a post-2012 major engineering project like this not to leave some kind of online footprint. SpinningSpark 15:54, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Update: the whole list of obstacles is now in a spreadsheet on the same site rather than the ENR document, but it is not listed there either. Thanks to Peter James for finding the archive copy which shows that if this is a hoax, it was a hoax on NATS or their sources, not one perpetrated by Wikipedia. SpinningSpark 20:40, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not appar to satisfy WP:V, and notability is also doubtful. Edison (talk) 22:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - The fact that there seems to be doubt as to its existence is reason to question whether the article should be there in itself, but the lack of sources mentioning it would suggest that even if it did ever exist then there is absolutely no evidence of notability. Dunarc (talk) 20:47, 15 August 2019 (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.