Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Californias (region)


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 08:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

The Californias (region)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page is about the same region covered by The Californias, only after the Californias were divided between two sovereign countries. It is a short article that has never had a reference in it. There is no reason [whatever this article is supposed to be about] can't be covered at The Californias. I don't even know if this usage of "Californias" for a region is notable: I haven't bothered to check and nobody since the article was created in 2013 apparently has either. Srnec (talk) 04:24, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * This article is about the physical region. The Californias is about a historic political entity that no longer exists. They are entirely separate subjects. I was in the middle of adding content and sourcing to the article when blocked by this hastily-added deletion nomination. Standard WP practice is to discuss these things on the Talk page before unilaterally taking such drastic action. The article's content, plus my blocked edits, can be found on the page Talk:The Californias (region). WCCasey (talk) 04:47, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The deletion notice doesn't block any editing. Improving the article while a deletion discussion is ongoing is definitely allowed. -Niceguyedc Go Huskies! 05:00, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You could still add your edits to the article if you want. I looked at the timing in the revision histories of the page and the talk page, and I think the deletion nomination just happened to be added while you were in the middle of editing the article (so it was just an edit conflict - your edits weren't actively being blocked). Alphius (talk) 05:03, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  17:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  17:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Clarification: I wasn't accusing anyone of blocking my edit. As Alphius said, the deletion notice was posted while I was editing, so that I got sent to the "edit conflict" page when I tried to save it. When I tried to do the normal copy-paste-save to resolve the conflict, however, I was not allowed to save it. I just went back to the article page, however, tried the edit again in the normal manner, and had no problems. Thanks to all for the help. WCCasey (talk) 07:24, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Speedy keep on the basis that Srnec's comment I don't even know if this usage of "Californias" for a region is notable: I haven't bothered to check suggests they haven't read WP:BEFORE. clpo13(talk) 16:40, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Even if notable, it can be covered at The Californias, which was a fluid thing anyway. I did not argue that it should be deleted because it wasn't notable, but a "merger" was out of the question since it had never been sourced. Srnec (talk) 04:15, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable synthesis. --Regards, James(talk/contribs) 00:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

One more clarification: the geographical boundaries of the "region" are far different from the boundaries of the old Spanish province. WCCasey (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The whole idea seems to boil down to the one sourced sentence in the article: "The term may be used when discussing areas along both sides of the border between the United States and Mexico." This can be covered at The Californias. —Srnec (talk) 04:15, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete and merge anything if needed afterwards, unlikely needed for two articles. SwisterTwister   talk  05:44, 6 February 2016 (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.