Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homan's Rock


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 20:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Homan's Rock

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A rock with a name inscribed. Not a monument, not remembering anything of importance. Quite baffling that this has been created actually. Fram (talk) 06:39, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: On a point of order, this is about one of 3 related articles separately nominated for AFD.  See Articles for deletion/Powder River Telegraph Station and Articles for deletion/Leopold Hohman. Can this be closed and one unified multiple AFD discussion be held? -- do  ncr  am  17:12, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge The three articles, Powder_River_Telegraph_Station, Leopold Hohman and Homan's Rock should be merged into a single article for the Telegraph Station. There is no need to have three articles about this one topic. Then, more references need to be added. LaMona (talk) 14:23, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Montana-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete this WP:walled garden per nom. Three zeros don't add up to anything other than zero (as in notability). Or we could redirect to Rachel Homan whenever she has the hammer. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. EricSerge (talk) 13:42, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. It doesn't sound odd at all.  It appears to be a landmark in Montana, as are a number of other inscribed rocks in the United States west (e.g. Initial Rock in North Dakota for one), and I believe that there will exist numerous mentions in historic, off-line sources.  It is a place, like a GNIS location, and a short article identifying it is highly appropriate.  Or, it could be redirected / merged to Leopold Hohman.  This AFD should have been opened as part of a multiple-AFD, so perhaps this should be closed procedurally in favor of a multiple one. -- do  ncr  am  17:12, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Question. Is there any official recognition of this rock? Initial Rock being on the NRHP elevates it to article-worthiness. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:48, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * A "landmark" without any sources about it? That's not a landmark, that's a non notable rock. And no, when you have three items with different possible notability (e.g. the telegraph station could have turned out to be notable, that wouldn't mean that this rock was notable), then three AfDs is better. Fram (talk) 07:19, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 08:21, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 16:25, 14 September 2014 (UTC)




 * Delete - Not notable. Should it be notable?  Maybe, but probably not.  We're not here to make that call. - Richfife (talk) 17:29, 23 September 2014 (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.