Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Jefferson (Ohio)


 * 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. JForget 23:14, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Mount Jefferson (Ohio)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Small hill in Shelby County, Ohio masquerading as a mountain. I don't see sufficient significant coverage to pass the general notability guidelines, unless by WP:OUTCOMES. While this may be listed as "Mount" by the GNIS, and while I have high respect for WP:OUTCOMES, this is nowhere near being a major geographic feature such as those mentioned in that page's "Geography and astronomy" section. For proof, consult USGS topographic maps here (also accessible if you go to its GNIS feature record, select "GNIS in Google Map", select the Topo view, and zoom in closely) — this "mountain" is along a roadside, and at only 968 feet of elevation, it's only eighteen feet above the streambed just to the north. Google's Satellite view will show that it's clearly not at all prominent — hardly a "major geographic feature". Nyttend (talk) 23:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It might have been a town once. Abductive  (reasoning) 00:09, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears to have been a village. --Oakshade (talk) 01:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, an unincorporated community appears to be there, but this an article about what the GNIS lists as a "summit", not a "populated place". Nyttend (talk) 01:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've asked the article's creator to drop by and explain this. Abductive  (reasoning) 02:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I created the page after consulting the GNIS for all summits called "Mount Jefferson". Obviously, the page content is taken from the GNIS record. GNIS gives a feature class of "summit" which according to the GNIS is defined as:"Prominent elevation rising above the surrounding level of the Earth's surface". The key point here that is being contested is "prominent". There are many varying definitions of topographic prominence around the world but I think all would agree that given the topo map, it is not really prominent. Without details on how its name was chosen, it's hard to say what the rationale was for calling it a mountain. It could also have been named even before the surrounding populated places came into being and may have been at one point in the past, "more prominent". If this "summit" was being named today, something like "Jefferson Ridge" may be more appropriate. Nevertheless, this is an officially named feature in the GNIS and it is officially classed as "summit". Perhaps the wording in the article should be changed to not say "mountain" but more something like "high point". Without having a picture or a local source providing an opposing or supporting view to the GNIS, I must rely on the GNIS definition although the topo map does challenge the "prominent" aspect in this case. RedWolf (talk) 03:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't this be decided on the basis of it having secondary sources as a prominence or not? It would otherwise be kept as a (formerly?) populated place. Abductive  (reasoning) 04:09, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, RedWolf, if I came across as accusing you of misuse of your sources; I simply meant to say that, given the somewhat local knowledge given by the map, I didn't think it was a mountain. Although going by experience alone would be OR, I must say — I've flown over Shelby County at a low altitude multiple times, and it's almost all flat.  Here's some local evidence: look at File:Sidney Municipal Airport in Ohio.jpg, a photo of part of Shelby County — it's farther east than Mount Jefferson; however, as it looks directly westward, if MJ were really a significant feature, you should be able to see it.  Finally: I'm curious, Abductive, why you say "formerly"; Google satellite view shows population there.  There is a GNIS entry for a community of, as well.  Nyttend (talk) 12:34, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked in Google News, all the references were very old, so I assumed it is gone now. I had to read the Wikipedia article on GNIS to find out what it is; it says right in the lead that they never remove an entry. So GNIS wouldn't tell me if the town was a ghost town or not, and I lost interest in researching further. Abductive  (reasoning) 02:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as rewritten to be about the community. The summit entry is clearly an error in the GNIS, since there is no summit there. --NE2 07:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A error in a government database? Who'd a thunk it? Abductive  (reasoning) 07:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep the rewritten version as it's a community.--Oakshade (talk) 05:45, 14 September 2009 (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.