Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piedmont Valley, South Dakota


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 06:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Piedmont Valley, South Dakota

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete Not notable. Piedmont Valley is not a named populated place in South Dakota, and the article as written duplicates some of what is already in the Piedmont article. This article appears to be synthesis. Piedmont is in a valley, so someone created an article titled "Piedmont Valley." There is no officially named place in South Dakota called "Piedmont Valley" per the Geographic Names Information System, which as been generally viewed in other Afds as a minimum standard (but by no means the only standard) by which to justify an article. The only google hits for Piedmont Valley, South Dakota seem to be aggregators that key off any "Place, State" search, or are links that reference back to this Wiki article. Searching for Piedmont Valley, South Dakota without quotation marks finds two businesses; Piedmont Valley Lutheran Church and a bank's branch location. The [ Red Valley or Race Track] mentioned in the article is a named geographic feature that circles the Black Hills. I think these items would be more appropriately included in the Piedmont or Black Hills articles rather than a stand alone article with little to no available reliable sources supporting the name. DCmacnut &lt; &gt; 15:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete There does not appear to be such a place as "Piedmont Valley." Not even a once-occupied hamlet, or a dot on some government map, or a name used in a Census, such as have been used to justify article on places which fail general notability. When I try "Piedmont Vally" in Google map, it finds no such place and points to "Piedmont, Virginia," which also has a valley. Fails verifiability. Even if someone used it as a mere description ("I plan to buy a farm somewhere in the Piedmont valley.") with valley lower case, that is not sufficient to justify an article. Edison (talk) 16:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Unnecessary article about what many would simply call Meade County, South Dakota. We also have an (older) article about Piedmont, South Dakota, and this seems to be one of a couple of SD-related contributions by an editor now long gone. Mandsford 17:40, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree. I significantly improved the other Piedmont article a few weeks ago, but it still has a long way to go. As originally written, both it at the Valley article had much of the same text. It makes no sense to have two articles about pretty much the same topic. Piedmont is now an incorporated city, and I plan to significantly expand and improve it as 2010 Census data becomes available.DCmacnut &lt; &gt; 19:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of what a shame it was that we had this, and lacked Piedmont Butte (which I turned up when looking for sources on this). Uncle G (talk) 19:40, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Dakota-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Piedmont Valley, South Dakota per WP:CHEAP. Bearian (talk) 20:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect "Piedmont Valley, South Dakota" to "Piedmont Valley, South Dakota"? That sounds like driving down the street and making four right turns...  Mandsford 15:30, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe Piedmont, South Dakota is what was meant? Mjroots (talk) 05:58, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Names that were invented for a Wikipedia article must be deleted. Redirection would benefit only one person, the article's creator. Abductive  (reasoning) 02:18, 5 August 2010 (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.