Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Landy Ice Rises


 * 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 per WP:SK; nomination is proposing a merge. J♯m (talk &#124; contribs) 21:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Landy Ice Rises

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Should be merged with the Bach Ice Shelf article J♯m (talk &#124; contribs) 19:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I am also nominating
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Saint Johns Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Alexander Island
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Alexander Island
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Alexander Island
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Saint Johns Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Saint Johns Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Cruzen Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with James Ross Island
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Gonville and Caius Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Cruzen Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Cruzen Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Cruzen Range
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Kukri Hills
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Wood Bay
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Victoria Land
 * &mdash; Should be merged with Taylor Valley

All of the above articles fail WP:GEOLAND and are of the same basic character: basic information from the USGS, including lat/long coordinates, and the occasional reference to who it was named for / who discovered it.

Rather than having a multiplicity of articles whose notability is questionable at best, I believe it would be better to include information on these features on the articles for the regions they inhabit, and thereby improve the quality of each article. Note also that most of the regional articles are themselves stubs and severely lacking in substantive information; by themselves, they might also fail WP:GEOLAND, but with the added information from these stubs, some of them might become quite good articles, even achieving Good or Featured status. As these stubs currently stand, there is almost no chance that any of them will ever become good articles. J♯m (talk &#124; contribs) 20:52, 19 January 2016 (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.