Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twin Falls, Arizona


 * 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. Consensus is sourcing is insufficient Star   Mississippi  21:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Twin Falls, Arizona

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

Could not find coverage to confirm that this place was notable or even existed. Searches of Arizona papers returned articles about Twin Falls, Idaho but not Arizona. –dlthewave ☎ 01:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Arizona. –dlthewave ☎ 01:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
 * We should delete this. According to KEZJ "It pretty much looks like a dirt road in the middle of, well... a bunch of dirt." A dirt road in the middle of a bunch of dirt is not important enough for Wikipedia. Maine   🦞  14:04, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:39, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep as per WP:NPLACE this is a named place that was once populated and even though it might not have people living there now that doesn't make it not notable as per WP:NTEMP. Looking over some maps from USGS I see that there are a few markers for buildings in maps from 1953, a map in 1959 notes the name of the place, and an 1892 map shows that there was a used road in that area. Looking at some information from the Navajo Nation it appears that the area is now a trail and at one time was used for hearing animals.  Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 05:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * , currently the article is sourced only to GNIS and its mirror, Hometown Locator; NPLACE specifically excludes GNIS from satisfying its "officially recognized" and "populated place" criteria. The other source you provided doesn't mention a populated place at Twin Falls, it only mentions a hike that leads to two (or possibly three) waterfalls. And buildings on a map are not proof that this was a notable place, that type of thing often turns out to just be someone's ranch or homestead. I would suggest finding more sources that establish either GNG or a "legally recognized populated place" if you'd like your !vote to be counted. –dlthewave ☎ 15:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If it's a place that is significant to the Navajo Nation then it should either be kept or redirected to Navajo Nation, or the appropriate chapterhouse if it has an article. Or Teec Nos Pos, Arizona, even. Also Navajo Times is as RS as it gets in that area. Local newspaper of record. Elinruby (talk) 23:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Navajo Times has a single sentence describing this as a waterfall that one can hike to. Do you think that's sufficient to meet GNG? –dlthewave ☎ 12:35, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * delete I can find no text evidence for this place, though it is heavily masked in searching by the place in Idaho. It's also unclear why the topos show a couple of buildings here, because the aerials show almost no change over the years except for the growth of vegetation, and there's no trace of buildings. At any rate there's no decent evidence for a town here or whatever it might have been. Mangoe (talk) 04:47, 4 April 2023 (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.