Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rowland, Missouri


 * 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 no consensus. No real consensus has emerged after over a month of discussion. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Rowland, Missouri

 * – ( View AfD View log )

State Historical Society calls it a "little trading point" with a post office; trading point seems to indicate a country store based on some of the other entries. Doesn't appear on any of the small-scale pre-GNIS topos. Google books is mostly bringing up people with the last name Rowland, particularly this one guy who was described as if he were the Nimrod of Missouri. Not seeing any indication of an actual legally recognized community here. Google maps leads me to an isolated farm. Hog Farm Bacon 03:39, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 03:39, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 03:39, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Community has history as being a local trading point. Do not delete this. Either Keep or Merge with township in which it is located.72.49.7.25 (talk) 03:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per my post on Sagrada: there's no reason why a suitably-motivated person wouldn't be capable of finding out more about the place, the GNIS entry and historical records pretty reliably establish that the place does/did exist, obviously not a hoax or contentious in any way -- nobody's going to get misled by this article existing. At absolute worst, I'd say to merge it into the page for the county it's from. jp×g 05:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: I think it would probably have been better to BUNDLE these nominations, since they all proceed from the same general premises, and arguments that are valid for one will be valid similarly for the others. jp×g 05:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Fails GEOLAND. Just because a place exists fails makes it significant. Paul H. (talk) 19:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The SandDoctor  Talk 00:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as someone was born here, indicating a population. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 16:16, 19 October 2020 (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.