Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olga, Arizona


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:34, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Olga, Arizona

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A passing siding obviated by double tracking, old aerials show nothing at all here except the track and the paralleling road. More recently there is some industrial agriculture just to the south, but no buildings of any sort, nor anything marked in older topos except the name "Olga" next to the siding. Searching is understandably difficult but I get nothing that indicates anyone ever lived here. Mangoe (talk) 19:57, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Mangoe (talk) 22:35, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Mangoe (talk) 22:35, 24 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Mass-produced junk, not a community Reywas92Talk 00:57, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think article creator Onel5969 intended this to be junk. It is listed in GNIS as a populated place (yes, know there are issues with this in some instances), but there's some evidence that a section foreman resided at Olga at one time, so there are instances of people claiming to be from Olga.--Milowent • hasspoken  15:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * None of which means mass-producing iffy stubs by pulling from a questionable database is a good idea. Hog Farm Bacon 15:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * If you think the GNIS is "questionable database" you might want to look into what many people think about Wikipedia!  We just work to make it better.  Personally I feel enriched to have learned about Olga.  I want to know who it is named after now.--Milowent • hasspoken  16:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * GNIS is very good with stating that something with a certain name existed at a certain point. Given some of what GNIS calls "populated places", I'd say it's a terrible idea to equate "populated place" with a community, so it's more rather bad editorial decision. See Articles for deletion/Headquarters, Arizona and Articles for deletion/Dilday Mill, Missouri for two of the more obvious ones. Hog Farm Bacon 17:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - Yep, a siding. Notability is a strong no. Hog Farm Bacon 02:22, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Location is run of the mill.TH1980 (talk) 23:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete This appears to be an actual stop on the Southern Pacific. is a contemporary mention. This 1910 newspaper article says marble was shipped from Olga. This 1921 newspaper article does list someone as being "from" Olga, but I don't think that is enough to consider this a populated place. I would also support a redirect if there were an article with this level of detail (stations/stops) on the railroad, but there isn't. MB 05:02, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete: a rusted siding, booked out of service. Notability is a strong no, as per above. -- Whiteguru (talk) 11:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: If someone can figure out what railroad line segment this was on, we may be able to create an article on that line with a list of main stops, which is more useful for readers than geostubs anyway.--Milowent • hasspoken 20:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Update: I dug around and determined this is on the Southern Pacific's line built across eastern Arizona in 1880, which reached Deming, New Mexico late in that year. In March 1881, the Santa Fe's lines from the east reached Deming, making this line the second transcontinental line across the United States. None of this makes Olga independently notable, but I suspect I can create an article suitable for this to redirect to.--Milowent • hasspoken  14:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of articles on rail lines giving a list of stations. Not keen on the idea of having every such station redirecting to the list. Mangoe (talk) 15:46, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair point. There are a lot of stations.--Milowent • hasspoken  16:54, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete: Olga was part of a previous blanket AfD which had a procedural keep.  Having a separate AfD is fine with me.  In the blanket AfD, Pontificalibus  wrote "Also keep Olga as this map (key) shows there  were a number of dwellings located there."  In that blanket AfD, I wrote "However, it seems that Olga is not a "Populated, legally recognized place" as per WP:GEOLAND #1 - there are no citations for a Post Office or form of local government. I'm seeing [Results_of_Spirit_Leveling_in_Arizona_18 references to Olga Siding], so WP:STATION would apply. WP:GEOLAND #2: "Populated places without legal recognition" says "any of which could be considered notable on a case-by-case basis, given non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources"  I don't think we have found the non-trivial coverage yet for Olga. Perhaps Olga should be deleted? BTW - there is a List of places in Arizona that looks to be a dump of GNIS.  The Arizona list is far too long when compared with List of places in California.  And while I'm at it, most of the Arizona pages use https://arizona.hometownlocator.com as a source.  It looks to me like https://arizona.hometownlocator.com is an aggregator of GNIS and other public data and is not WP:RS.  Perhaps https://arizona.hometownlocator.com should be removed as a reference on these articles?" Cxbrx (talk) 15:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Takes a considerable stretch of the imagination to consider this notable in any fashion. Not a community and not notable under basic Wiki standard: multiple in-depth articles from reliable sources. Glendoremus (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.