Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lemon Creek, Staten Island


 * 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 Keep Eluchil404 02:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Lemon Creek, Staten Island

 * — (View AfD)

This is apparently just a stream. Doesn't claim to be notable in any way...however, there may well be articles on far less exciting streams than this in Wikipedia. WP:NN Montchav 00:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Staten Island. No claim of notability.  Google search for "Lemon Creek" "Staten Island" verifies its existence but shows nothing more significant than "the most this'n'that on the south shore of Staten Island".  Like all creeks near populated areas it's had water drawn from it and it's been polluted a bit.  WP:NOT a directory, a travel guide, or an indiscriminate collection of information.  If locals can document that the creek or the adjacent park have more than minor local significance, that can be added to the parent article.  Barno 17:36, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Article make explicit claims of notability, and should be kept along with all of the other geographic features of New York City. As usual, WP:NOT is being misinterpreted to mean "anything that I think should be deleted". Alansohn 08:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please identify the "explicit claims of notability" that you see in the article. Neither at this writing nor twelve hours ago did I see any content that claims importance or coverage that would meet any notability guidelines.  As usual, notability guidelines are being misinterpreted to mean "anything that I think should be kept".  I can identify at least thirty streams along which I've hiked in the last year, none of which merit WP articles despite being geographic features of New York State, Pennsylvania, or Virginia.  Barno 14:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


 * keep Any remaining open waterways inside large cities are possibly notable: they are so few and so precarious. Should be verifiable. Alansohn is right, and that anythin gtends to be things relating to cities and science and art, which do go together (smile).DGG 02:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "Poss[i]bly notable", "should be verifiable": Yes, well, I tried using Google to see whether it is notable and is verifiable, and I didn't find any of the first three pages of hits to be substantive and independent coverage that showed any distinction or any impact on culture. About the biggest thing was a local notice of hearings on water rights.  If there's anything meeting WP's general standards, I didn't see it.  If this is a place notably "relating to cities and science and art", that hasn't made its way to newspapers and magazines.  In other words, please demonstrate that it has been noted in reliable sources, don't just handwave without evidence.  I don't have my mind set against including this creek's article, I just need to see something that meets WP standards.  If "open waterway inside a large city" is a claim of notability under some policy or guideline that I haven't seen, please point me to it.  Barno 21:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I've just done a large expansion and referencing of the article. Given its local status (only freshwater marsh in Staten Island, has only colony of purple martins in NYC, former importance of oystering industry at mouth) and the sources I've been able to find, I think it should qualify for a separate article under WP:LOCAL. Choess 07:29, 13 January 2007 (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.