Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warrior Creek (Georgia)


 * 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 redirect to Little River (Withlacoochee River tributary). Consensus is that the evidence provided for keeping does not necessarily indicate a notability pass. Hog Farm Talk 05:02, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Warrior Creek (Georgia)

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

Contested WP:BLAR to its parent body of water, Little River (Withlacoochee River tributary). Per WP:GEOLAND, natural features are notable "provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist". In this case, there appears to be no significant sourcing beyond databases and maps, which means it would fail GEOLAND. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  09:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Georgia (U.S. state). &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  10:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete I added Warrior John and his source to the Little River article, which was the only substantive content here. It should be a redirect. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:47, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect > Little River (Withlacoochee River tributary). Djflem (talk) 19:48, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Its watershed is large enough that it has been federally assigned its own 10-digit hydrologic unit code, and as such is a unit of governmental study such as here and here. --TimK MSI (talk) 11:34, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I am agog to hear about where in WP:GEOLAND or any other WP notability guideline, the federally assigned 10-digit hydrologic unit code is mentioned. Agog, I tell you. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I mention it as a good-faith effort to indicate the size of the creek's watershed, and to support what follows-- the two government reports on the creek's watershed (which I found via a cursory Google search), not as an assertion of notability in itself. Apologies that this wasn't clear. Watersheds of this size tend to be a topic of governmental study, resulting in reports that contain "information beyond statistics and coordinates," and such reports are indeed "known to exist" in this case. Thanks--TimK MSI (talk) 16:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Those appear to be primary sources though, especially that first one, the government action plan. Like...by analogy, to me, that'd be like taking a government plan to build a new road as an indication of the notability of the road. I'm willing to hear arguments to the contrary. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:07, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Redirect to Little River (Withlacoochee River tributary) with no prejudice towards recreation if someone wants to expand it with multiple RS beyond primary sources. I think TimK MS makes a compelling case that it's size may in fact mean that there are sources out there that could be used to expand the article further. However, I think we would need something more than just government reports. Until that RS emerges, a redirect it the best option.4meter4 (talk) 03:52, 19 June 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.