Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Langshot


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 03:50, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Langshot

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

unsourced stub of what is alleged to be an area of Glasgow, but so obscure as to be unidentifiable. Historical maps show Langshot Farm which is now under the M8 motorway and a nearby street of that name which contains a few tenement dwellings of no particular significance. Coordinates provided (to East of the farm) refer to a warehouse, previously Kinning Park goods railway station, historic maps from several eras do not show any nearby premises named Langshot. Creator needs to provide evidence of the notability of this place, I have been able to do so - it was the location of an unusually long tenement building, but nothing I have found for that mentions Langshot as the name of the neighbourhood. Crowsus (talk) 02:54, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. 02:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. 01:56, 19 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2019 December 19.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 03:06, 19 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per above, having one building with a name or having had a farm by that name in a spot 100 years ago but no indication anyone uses that name for the neighborhood doesn't rate an article. JamesG5 (talk) 03:35, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Do you have a topographical qualification Paul? I shouldn't have to go through barony boundaries, natural boundaries and natural land ownership time and time again. Did you study geography? The map is pretty self explanatory when you overlay it. Especially since Glasgows shape hasn't changed in 100s of years. Please go and look around. Everything is as it was back in that map...apart from a few warehouses, houses and a motorway. The the main stuctures of Roads and Trainways are the same. Even the outline of the lands the people seem acceptable such as Craigton or Linhouse.

Thas old back structure and map you dispute IS Glasgow. You can go around any area of that map and compare those "Farms" to built up housing or communities, they still have the same labels. The difference being that they weren't savaged by motorways or industrialisation.

A neighbourhood or Farm had a shipyard or motorway builton it and it became "the Clyde shipyard" or "the motorway".

That is how it is in Scotland. Our traditions are everything and Glasgow has a resoundingly large proportion of heritage site and preserved tenement buildings. I don't know what its like in other cities or countries that constant regenerate or have new money - our city was established around the barony.

Ibrox was once a farm. Dumbreck was once a farm. Linthouse was once a farm. Cessnock was once a farm. Shieldhall was once a farm. Craigton was once a farm. Cardonald was once a farm. I am saying this in statements because the reductive way you appraise these leaves a lot to be desired. I shouldn't have to justify the natural boundary of a new motorway and how it will obviously bring back the previous Label after a 100 year merger into a burgh.

What are we going call both side of the motorway? Kinning Park part 1 and Kinning Park Part 2? Cmon guys.

I can surely tell you that Kinning Park isn't in the middle of the motorway.

My article stands ground. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Progress4weegies (talk • contribs) 05:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete My searches bring up only "Langshot Street" (in Ibrox or Kinning Park) and "Langshot Farm" in the historical books I found (of which there weren't many,) then shortened to Langshot. I don't see any evidence anywhere the plot of land between the M8 is actually referred to as "Langshot" in modern times. SportingFlyer  T · C  06:47, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Undecided. I added a couple of sources relating to the farm but I could only find one source where the name "Langshot" is used on its own and that appears to refer to the farm. However, local knowledge might indicate otherwise. Deb (talk) 10:21, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment At the risk of overstating this, I have also really tried to find evidence of anything being referred to as Langshot in modern times without success. The industrial estate between the motorway and railway probably should have been called Langshot if there was sufficient respect for local history, but it doesn't look like that happened. As I have said on the article talk, I went up and down the streets on StreetView but no local businesses use the name, and a nostalgic forum discussion on a very long tenement at that location never mentioned the term once even though most of the participants were former residents pre-motorway. Yes, most places in the city (and indeed every city) were named after older estates and farms which were swallowed up, and I think we can all agree that there was a Langshot Farm of some local prominence prior to the arrival of industry and housing, but that is all that the sources verify. Not every old name survived to be used in modern contexts, and the fact that nothing has been found by multiple editors in searches for this particular name in the 20th century, even in the residential context before its core became a road, indicates that it doesn't justify a separate article. The existing refs could be a useful addition to the Kinning Park article. But maybe something will be found in the coming days. Crowsus (talk) 11:11, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as a place without legal recognition and not an OS settlement. The sources only appear to mention "Langshot Farm" and the fact that an industrial/housing scheme ended up there. It could possibly be mentioned (and redirected) to an article on its burgh but even that seems questionable since the sources are still about the farm rather than the area but its probably a reasonably search term so I'd be fine with that.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 11:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - does not appear to meet WP:GEOLAND, and not enough in-depth sourcing to meet WP:GNG. Onel 5969  TT me 18:32, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment The author has now updated the article: they added four references to locations on Google Maps in the relevant area which currently have Langshot as part of their address. Having checked Maps as one of the first things I did yesterday after this article appeared and found no trace of the name, I'm 98% certain those addresses were amended today and have now been added to the article to support the argument. One of the businesses involved has a website with their address on it - listing it as Kinning Park. Therefore it seems very unlikely that they would use a different address on Maps to their website. As an experiment, I removed one of the more subtle Langshot additions and it was accepted as an edit with no questions asked so it is definitely something which could be done. If anyone has awareness of any tools to check when edits were made on Google Maps, please let me know so that I can check, or have a look yourself. Crowsus (talk) 23:57, 19 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, fails WP:Geoland.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 09:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete all the sources I see merely prove existence, which is below the threshold for Wikipedia articles; fails the minimum standards of WP:GNG. -- Jayron 32 11:43, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

So, Crowsus, you have went around changing details of the BID I am employed to? Which business? You have no right to change people's company's to try and force your own findings. No wonder it's not on the map. ^^^^ He has done the same thing with the historic area Kingston in the past - removing it from Google Maps. This area is called Langshot, such that the local use the term, theaps also supports the finding NHS as Glasgow has been established around farms. I will not have someone from Australia or India dictate what relevant when the labels of their land changes with the owner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Progress4weegies (talk • contribs) 12:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * My reply, although they can't respond as now blocked: First off, what is a BID and what is your commercial relationship to it in relation to Wikipedia, you have to declare all business interests which may influence editing, see WP:COI. I only removed the word Langshot from the address of one company (which it does not require, as it won't help anyone find the premises for reasons outlined above i.e nobody has ever heard of it) to satisfy myself from a technical perspective that you would have been able to do precisely the opposite earlier that day to try and influence this matter in your favour. The fact that, after I spotted the Langshot name in those company addresses having seeing none the previous day (and which other editors would surely also have pointed out when first trying to find this place had they seen it in addresses, but none did so) you then added those exact links onto the article as evidence of its common usage, then also specifically mentioned them in your edit summary as justification for attempting (again) to remove the AfD notice, is a clear indication, at least to me, that you have made these manipulations. Frustratingly I have been unable to find a function that shows when those edits were made, but there is no doubt in my mind that they happened between Wednesday evening 18/12/19 and Thursday afternoon 19/12/19, UK time. Lastly, FWIW I fully support the Kingston area's inclusion in the encyclopedia as can be seen in its talk page, although as I recall its article was fairly ropey in its quality and references when first created at the start of this year. I have absolutely not touched Google Maps in relation to that area or anywhere else other than the single one fully disclosed above. Maybe you're thinking of someone else, or maybe you're just inventing the whole thing as nobody seems to have thought of using that tactic except for you. It could also be pointed out that as the low level stuff can be edited by users, it falls into the same category as forums and Wikis in being a non-WP:RS when it comes to citation, so you're wasting your time. Crowsus (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete I can't even find evidence of existence of an area anyone would call "Langshot". The Google Map references are, in all likelihood, faked up, as even cursory background checks show:
 * Claremont Centre: I found NO references to Claremont Centre that used "Langshot", other than this page. The firm's own website lists its address as "Kinning Park", not "Langshot"
 * Clutha House: I found NO references to Clutha House that used "Langshot", other than this page and pages which provide direction (via Langshot Street) to Clutha House.
 * Langshot Pet Park: This seems to be ENTIRELY made up, as I find no reference to its very existence other than -- you guessed it -- this page.
 * --Calton &#124; Talk 00:57, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think business listings show notability per WP:GNG anyway. So even if they are genuine we probably can't keep this article.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:39, 22 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as failing the criteria set out at WP:GEOLAND. I note the article creator is currently blocked; if it is true that they have fabricated sources, then this should probably be reflected in their block log. Pinging User:Jayron32 as the blocking admin. ——  SN  54129  11:53, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: There was a fire "on the farm of Mr. Lyon, Langshot, about two miles from Glasgow, near to the Paisley Road." in 1833, hardly of note but something I found. MilborneOne (talk) 00:10, 25 December 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.