Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rowley, Utah


 * 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 Move to Rowley industrial area. I have made the move. The rest can be handled editorially. Star  Mississippi  17:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Rowley, Utah

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

We're looking at two possible locations here, neither of which is notable: At the coordinates given in the article, topo maps show a place labelled Rowley at the end of a rail spur smack in the middle of a US Magnesium processing facility. The article mentions only industrial activity, nothing about a community, and there doesn't seem to be enough coverage of that to meet GNG/GEOLAND. A user-contributed entry at Ghosttowns.com seems to describe this location a few miles away, and there's a Rowley Road just across the interstate, but there's no indication that this spot was anything more than a truck stop. –dlthewave ☎ 04:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Utah. –dlthewave ☎ 04:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * delete The truck stop location is labelled "Timpie" on the topos. No evidence the other spot was ever a settlement. Mangoe (talk) 05:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * (Author) Keep I have to say, the pinging off of the populated place articles I wrote is really the last thing I thought would happen; these seemed like so much more permanent a contribution to world knowledge than the marginally notable rock bands I usually write about, but the world never stops surprising me. I don't have much evidence of historical settlements, but there is industrial activity in this area dating back to the 1970s, and it is the site of major EPA regulation, in addition to what's already cited in the article. This is a place with significant mining/industrial operations, and as a place with substantial history of human usage it merits encyclopedic inclusion. That may necessitate a name change (to, e.g., Rowley industrial area), but not deletion. Chubbles (talk) 06:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * At the very least the sources do not support the statement that this is a populated place or unincorporated community, so that should be removed. The existence of industrial plants there doesn't mean it's a community.  Hut 8.5  16:11, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Discuss the move as a viable AtD. Normally that could be handled editorially, but at the moment the article would be deleted, so that's not a solution here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  02:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete The 1970 article states that Rowley was a "brand new place". I found no evidence that anyone lived there.  In light of EPA issues, it seems like an odd place to raise a family.  Cxbrx (talk) 00:42, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * But you just uncovered another source that substantiates that it is a place with substantial human history. It doesn't matter if no one lived there; that's a cleanup-not-delete problem. Chubbles (talk) 07:37, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm unsure about the notability of industrial plants. I don't think this industrial plant is notable, but others might disagree.  The problem is that the article has a settlement infobox and short description that say it is an unincorporated community.  I don't believe that it is a community.  It certainly is not a notable community that passes WP:GEOLAND.  Rowley, Utah is not a notable community.  Perhaps the article could be moved to the current name of the plant? Cxbrx (talk) 15:39, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Are there any objections to a move to Rowley industrial area? Chubbles (talk) 07:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep: Seems notable as a place based on news coverage even if not a populated place.   Moving it to "Rowley industrial area" really doesn't seem necessary though i don't object to it.  For what's worth Exit 77 off I-80 in Utah is signed as for "Rowley" and "Dugway"; one gets on Rowley road at that exit to get to the industrial site.--Milowent • hasspoken  18:00, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Chubbles and Milowent above. Not a hoax or a cartographic error, but an actual documented place. I have no objection to the proposed move to Rowley industrial area, with the current title remaining as a redirect. BD2412  T 03:32, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: No evidence has been found that Rowley, Utah has had permanent residents or any other feature that would indicate that it is a community. It is a collection of factories.  It might be notable, it might not, I've not looked in to notability of factories, though I suspect that factories have similar notability to that of mines and should probably just follow WP:GNG  I don't mind keeping the article if and only if the article is clear that it is not a community.  So, I've been bold and changed the Infobox Settlement to a Template:Infobox_factory. Feel free to revert or use a different template, see List of infoboxes/Place.  As Rowley has never been an unincorporated community, I removed it from the various county templates (feel free to revert).  Moving to Rowley industrial area is fine with me. Cxbrx (talk) 14:57, 9 October 2022 (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.