Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swansons Landing, Texas


 * 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. ✗ plicit  02:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Swansons Landing, Texas

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Coordinates lead me to someone's yard on the edge of a lake near a dead end road named Swansons Landing. There's an RV park nearby but I don't think this is a settlement per se. wizzito &#124; say hello!  01:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. wizzito  &#124; say hello!  01:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. wizzito  &#124; say hello!  01:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep but rewrite This is mainly just hyperlocal coverage about a family cleanup effort. Part of this article is useless for notability purposes (announcement of a boat ride), but the historical material is. This is a useful source. This has some historical material. Solid piece about a historical marker here. This also contributes to notability. There is more coverage here as well.  Not a community, but passes WP:GNG through coverage from it as a historic steamboat landing and early rail point. Hog Farm Talk 03:06, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I added a reference from Handbook of Texas. The references found by Hog Farm should also be added. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:25, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep meets our WP:NGEO guidelines. As an inland port this area passes "Named natural features" Here is an article showing the historic marker. Lightburst (talk) 19:48, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep; A newspaper search concludes that Hog Farm beat me to clipping all of the relevant articles. The sources mentioned above clear GNG, regardless of whether it was an inhabited place; it should definitely be expanded with these sources (rather than the AfD simply closing, where the sources languish for another 10 years until someone nominates it a second time)... jp×g 23:33, 28 September 2021 (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.