Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stovepipe Wells, California


 * 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 keep. Missvain (talk) 03:14, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Stovepipe Wells, California

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is apparently the oldest of several "towns" in Inyo County which are and apparently always were hotels/resorts/etc. Gudde explains the origin of the name but doesn't describe the place at all; a Fodors guide gives a bit more detail, but nothing contradicts what the oldest topos I could find (admittedly not all that old) say: it's the Stovepipe Wells Hotel. It's unclear why later maps deviate from this, but the name of the establishment hasn't changed. I see no sign it was ever a town per se, and I don't see signs that it is especially notable as a hotel. Mangoe (talk) 23:50, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge a short summary to California Historical Landmarks in Inyo County. State-level listing, especially as only a fairly minor site, seems to be below WP:GEOFEAT #1, which references national level.  Doesn't seem to have been anything that would pass WP:GEOLAND, but since it does have a state-level historical listing, a merge to the list would be an acceptable WP:ATD, in my opinion. Hog Farm Bacon 06:58, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  09:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  09:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep. Despite the fact that it has no post office, Stovepipe wells should be probably kept because it has non-trivial coverage:, .  There are also many other references, this is less trivial: , there are more and more trivial references.  Looking at GBooks, the National Park Service has a paper about it, there are many references in travel guides.
 * To me, there is an interesting question concerning the notability of places like this where there is a gas station or small business surrounded by miles of non-notable desert. If this location was in a beach resort community, it would not be notable.  What is notable about it is that there is nothing of note nearby.  The west is full of places like this,  see Majors Place, Nevada and Oasis, Nevada (a CDP!). Panamint Springs, California might also fall in to this category.  Please don't let my Weak Keep block consensus about merging or deleting.  Cxbrx (talk) 17:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep passes WP:GEOLAND as a historical populated place. KylieTastic (talk) 17:34, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Places of interest in the Death Valley area. A remote motel is not a populated place that has automatic notability. The National Park Service source above shows that this region certainly deserves discussion with respect to the national park it lies within, but it is certainly not a town/community any more than other ranger stations and campsites with facilities. Reywas92Talk 01:41, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GEOLAND Jeepday (talk) 19:10, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 01:55, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:GEOLAND as a historical populated place. I came here to add more historical data! Telecine Guy (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Add California Historical Landmarks, keep is done! The Merge, lacked this info. Telecine Guy (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, meets WP:NGEO, this article reflects that WP is a gazetteer. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Cxbrx and because it does actually pass GEOLAND Spiderone  10:07, 10 December 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.