Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indianola (Fields Landing), California


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 00:21, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Indianola (Fields Landing), California

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Prodded by @User:Reywas92 with the rationale "Notability not established for locale, fails WP:GEOLAND; recreation welcome with significant sources to pass WP:V and WP:N". Deprodded thanks to "multiple sources", but unless these are shown, please note that there's another Indianola in the same county. Geschichte (talk) 16:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete No evidence that this meets WP:GEOLAND. The "multiple sources" (two, to be exact) are routine listings in a gazetteer and USGS database which don't contribute to notability. –dlthewave ☎ 18:33, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Page 315 states this area is "rural with very small communities (Beatrice, Hookton, Indianola, and Southport Landing)". If GNIS calls it a populated places, and a report by a private research firm calls it a "very small community", then is passes WP:GEOLAND. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:44, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * To pass GEOLAND, it must be legally recognized, which GNIS does not do. It is a database of names that have appeared on maps. Being a "very small community" like a neighborhood does not automatically pass GEOLAND, though there may be significant coverage for part 2. This source isn't quite there. Reywas92Talk 04:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: GEOFEAT points to GNG for places without legal recognition and this does not have multiple IS RS with SIGCOV.  // Timothy :: talk  05:00, 22 January 2021 (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.