Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ping, Washington


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  01:37, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Ping, Washington

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Contested PROD. No information at all found about this place; satellite view of coordinates shows a rural intersection with a couple of scattered farms in the area. GNIS is insufficient for notability, as is the onetime existence of a post office. The place-names guide (reference 4) does call it a "town" but I have strong doubts about its reliability; it uses the word "town" to describe countless other places that were nothing more than railroad sidings or individual farms. Fails WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 00:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Washington. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 00:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * delete OK, here's why you can't always trust placenames books. Mr. Meany cites An illustrated history of southeastern Washington, and you can in fact download a copy from the LoC. And you will find on the page 49 that he cites a narrative concerning some conflict between the settlers and the natives, but no mention of Mr. Ping. However, on page 498 you will find the sort of hagiographic capsule biography of Elisha Ping typical of the period and of works such as this, and it doesn't mention this place at all or that he had any association with it. Also, there's the distinct problem that he was in a different county. However, on pages 548-549, there is a short mention of "Ping postoffice" under "Other Towns" in Garfield County, and it does line up with Meany's statements. But in reading the section as a whole it's clear that these were places that, by and large, didn't become towns, and therefore the post office evaporated. So, even the place that is supposed to be saying this was a town, doesn't really say that. And that's pretty much it. Mangoe (talk) 03:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Also available as, which also says 49. One lesson of  is indeed to follow up Meany's cited sources and beware of transcription errors. Uncle G (talk) 09:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * By the way: You missed page 286 of which points out that Elisha Ping's homestead became Dayton.  Garfield County was Columbia County until 1881, by the way, if that's what you mean by Elisha Ping in Columbia being in a different county.  The Dayton on Patit Creek is at 46.3491°N, -117.9295°W some 44 km away, which seems to contraindicate Elisha Ping and Dayton being this other Ping.  However, the explanation on page 292 of how in 1875 Columbia County was originally going to be Ping County is illuminating.  Elisha Ping and the failed Ping County are, it turns out, Dayton, Washington.  Page 603 tells us about William Long, farmer and (relevantly) postmaster, notice.  Uncle G (talk) 10:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Firstly, I believe what Mangoe says, secondly there are no mentions in any news paper in the area. There are not any sources in any of the usual places. It's already known that post offices in the 1880s were frequently place central to populated rural areas to better serve them and provide a place for the postal carrier to stay at overnight. So It's not proof of anything.James.folsom (talk) 23:47, 13 March 2024 (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.