Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Windy Corner, Isle of Man


 * 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 List of named corners of the Snaefell Mountain Course. maintaining the prior consensus at the RfC closed by on the article talk page. There is no evidence presented that the subject meets WP:GEOLAND - the feature is clearly a section of road (i.e. not natural) and all claims otherwise seem to be unsupported by the references given. ansh 666 03:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Windy Corner, Isle of Man

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It's time to delete this article which basically duplicates List of named corners of the Snaefell Mountain Course. Attempts to #redirect have created disruption. There was consensus to MERGE but that hasn't worked, either. Atsme 📞📧 17:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Obviously the place passes WP:GEOLAND, being a named feature. The list is no substitute because that is focussed only a particular race and the content in the list entry is negligible.  For reader navigation purposes, the name Windy Corner is far more useful that some complex list title. Andrew D. (talk) 18:53, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * keep per WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG -- Aunva6talk - contribs 20:30, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a small corner on a mountain course and is already named as a feature in the main article of the course - List of named corners of the Snaefell Mountain Course - just want to make sure participants in this AfD are aware of this fact. Atsme 📞📧 20:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Whatever it is, putting it in a list with a bunch of other stuff does not improve matters for the reader who wants to find out about it. It's best kept simple so that Windy Corner takes the reader to a page about that place, with specific images, coordinates, topography and history, as we have here.  If a list is needed, it should be brief, rather than some sprawling and confusing conglomerate.  For example, I recently started a page about Hanging Sword Alley.  It's not a big place but is notable and has some good history, which I shall be expanding on. Merging this into some gargantuan list of streets in London would not serve the reader so well. Andrew D. (talk) 22:57, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a single feature that is only notable as part of the mountain course where consensus said it should be redirected. Even WP:GEOLAND states If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the feature can instead be included in a more general article on local geography. There are no books, maps, or multiple RS that focus only on this one feature. The sources include it as part of the bigger, more notable topic of the region or the course. Atsme 📞📧 16:02, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:44, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:44, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:44, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I note that this article was disruptively restored earlier today (with an edit summary of "removal of local consensus see BRD: No consensus on redirect, or target of redirect due to synthesis WP:SYN, original research WP:N and non-existent notability WP:N") having been redirected to List of named corners of the Snaefell Mountain Course as the result of a previous RfC ( by User:Drmies on 23 February 2015‎), by the same editor who has done so multiple times in the past, against consensus - see its history, and its talk page. Note that User:11thmilestone, who previously kept restoring the page, was blocked as a sock puppet of the editor who made today's restoration. Note also that the page was stable as a redirect from 20 August 2016 until today. Accordingly, it should be redirected again, once the current content has been deleted . Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Having read comments below, I believe that the history should indeed be kept. I'm also reminded of previous discussions, which showed that the article's claim to notability per WP:GEOLAND are bogus. Perhaps what is needed is an administrative injunction on Agljones to refrain from repeating this behaviour. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:56, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List_of_named_corners_of_the_Snaefell_Mountain_Course per prior consensus. The target section already sufficiently covers the subject, which is not notable for a stand-alone article. K.e.coffman (talk) 21:56, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect, per previous RFC and all rational discussion over many years. If I had noticed the editor had restored the article I would have re-re-re-re-re-redirected it to the list-article which I opened, partly to provide reasonable resolution of this .  I believe leaving edit history available in the redirect is helpful for future reference, to hold accountable the parties involved when they argue on and on, in the future, as is likely.  Please note this diff in which I report that the main force involved had basically lied about what their key source said.  They claimed the source established Windy Corner was an area of open moorland.  They failed to respond adequately to requests they provide photocopy or other proof of what their sources said.  I bought a copy of the main source and found that it absolutely did not say what it was claimed to say.  Not to put a fine point on it, but they were caught redhanded in a lie.  I similarly disbelieve the same editor's assertions now present in the current version/fabrication of the article.  There is no merit to this article;  it should be redirected and I don't think this AFD is even necessary. --Doncram (talk) 23:36, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I appreciate User:Andrew Davidson's view that a named feature with lots of coverage should be kept, but they are assuming that information currently in the article is accurate, when it is not. It is twisted rubbish.  We need not assume good faith when it is not merited, as here.  Here is another diff from AFD on similar article where it was established that claim of Site of Special Scientific Interest was a lie, too, when a different editor got the source.  Now this Windy Corner article has a SSSI claim which I expect is false, too.
 * By the way, when looking at the main contributors contributions to look for this, I see that they have just recently made disruptive move, obviously controversial, of the Snaefell Mountain Course article, with edit summary claiming that it is not controversial. The sheer volume of shiite in AFDs, Talk pages, as well as put into the articles in mainspace related to Windy Corner and other Isle of Man race-course corners is cumulatively amazing and massively disruptive to Wikipedia.  I would contribute evidence if someone would initiate a permanent topic ban from this area for the involved editor. --Doncram (talk) 00:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The article passes WP:GEOLAND for notability as the location was previously occupied. Also WP:GEOROAD as the location is "subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable and independent of the subject," such as the Broderick publication in note (1) which does not actually define the article as " a small corner on a mountain course" as previously suggested by User:Atsme.  The "corner" is much large than the editor describes as shown by the restricted safety areas in the road closing order for the 2017 Isle of Man TT races. The editor User:Atsme can either edit the article in this manner, although this would be original research WP:OP as the "corner" prior to 1922 was in a different position and actual a gate which was the boundary between two parcels of UK Government Crown land. The merger of the article and not a redirect was suggested by the User:Drmies.  The merge of articles to the Snaefell Mountain Course has not worked as actually highlighted by the editor USER:doncram. There was no consensus of the redirect to the List of named corners of the Snaefell Mountain Course and is a local consensus by the same editor USER:doncram.  The two references used in the target line List of named corners of the_Snaefell Mountain_Course as highlighted by USER:K.e.coffman,  when used in this way are not encyclopaedic and represent a contradictory synthesis of sources not permitted by Wikipedia WP:SYN.  As highlighted previously to editors, the List article does not possess a citation relative to the executive summary/lede paragraph one for interdependent notability WP:N and unlikely ever to do so.  This is due to the term,  "Snaefell Mountain Course" being a contemporary local historic newspaper and journalist term for the Highroads Course for automobile racing in the period 1911-1922. Again, Wikipedia does not allow synthesis of sources WP:SYN, sources are not notable in this context WP:N and the list article is an unnecessary repository for whimsical and flippant citations WP:V which is creating circular reporting problems. WP:CITOGEN In respect to large article lists, Wikipedia writes  that "...editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles" WP:LSTN Verifiability, not truth. Comment The USER:doncram along with another editor has received a final warning from the same editor User:Drmies for repeating the use of "laundry lists," spurious Single purpose Account and Conflict of Interest claims and disrupting Wikipedia to make a point by removing edits from the Isle of Man TT races article (there is no issue of "whitewashing") as the editor USER:doncram disliked the edits (it is required by Wikipedia that reliable sources represent majority views and also represent significant minority views WP:BIAS, WP:BURDEN.)  The editor USER:doncram has also repeatedly vandalised two other other articles with spurious objections, in particular removing any citation mentioning the word "moorland" and replaced a title line for a BRD discussion to avoid BRD process. Despite misunderstanding amongst editors, the editor USER:doncram has also asked Wikipedia to reinstate the Ginger Hall article after it was deleted (see talk page:Windy Corner.)  The editor USER:doncram has also used the Request for Closure to prematurely closed down a copyright enquiry in regard to the same List Article (now either archive, suppressed or both) and despite this, Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia is very clear that for copyright in non-US countries has to be observed. The editor USER:doncram has never historically given an alternative explanation or definition for the heath and heather moorland, despite the numerous references in secondary sources (see talk pages for Windy Corner, Keppel Gate and Brandywell articles) and in this edit uses the term "moorland" []. The editor USER:doncram has also mentioned a publication and the citation was explained in this edit on the Windy Corner talk page []. The publication writes on page 81 or page 59 depending on the version;- "...Cross the style and enter the "mountain land"...."  Where is this style ?  It is actually the most southerly boundary of the area of Slieau Lhoost which was purchased in 1933 as shown in the revised article.  It is the same area which is an ASSI as defined by a "SC3781 A portion of the south western slope of Slieau Ree" and the same author writes about "heather and ling" which only grow on acidic moorland soil and is also the same moorland as referred to be in this same edit [].  The report  Habit Survey 1991, gives an 'arbitrarily' moorland definition as peat soil being greater than 25cm 50cm.  The soil depth of peat in this areas is greater than 50cm which qualifies for the definition of "moorland" and in the area of Beinn-y-Phott it is greater than 3 metres. In regard to other comments it is not clear what the editor is referring too.  In the Keppel Gate article a recent publication for 2017 stated that R.O Clark crashed at the  "33rd Milestone."  For the other article, the 2017 Isle of Man TT Race Regulations clearly states "Isle of Man TT Mountain Circuit" and not "Snaefell Mountain Course." agljones(talk)11:27, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * User:Drmies Please can you comment on the claims made about you above; specifically i) whether a redirect was the intention of your close of the RfC and ii) your alleged warning to other editors, and its bearing on this AfD? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:35, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Andy, are you asking me to read through agljones's comments? I may need some more champagne for that. What I was suggesting to Atsme was that an admin (such as me) could consider restoring the RfC-endorsed merge ("merge" automatically involves a redirect...). If I was warning anyone, it would certainly be the editor who made this edit--not Doncram, who on multiple occasions reverted that disruptive reinstatement of all that content. One would think that after being blocked for creating a sock to make just these edits, they'd stop doing that. Anyway, if this AfD somehow closes as "keep" (I would find that strange, given the lack of arguments put forward by Andrew Davidson and Aunva6), ... no I don't see how this will close as "keep". Drmies (talk) 18:23, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect as before. It's not a geographic feature, it's just one of many turns on a road racing course. Details about the road and the land nearby doesn't make it worth an article. --Michig (talk) 21:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per GEOLAND and there is far too much topic-specific content to redirect. --Oakshade (talk) 04:38, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Tis not. There is no content on the page worth keeping.  It is all nonsense;  it is false assertions that the corner is an area of moorland etc.  It is not. --Doncram (talk) 21:39, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. WP:GEOLAND says natural features can be notable. This is an area of heathland which is a natural feature and the refs look ok. The RFC closed as no consensus which defaults to keep - the article should not have been redirected. Szzuk (talk) 15:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That RfC was in 2014 and was overridden by the Feb 2015 RfC which was closed as merge by . The RfC was ignored and the #redirect reverted. Atsme 📞📧 15:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Striking my own vote. Szzuk (talk) 15:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment The feature is a col which is a geographical feature as described in another disputed publication on page 116.  The peat soil is of depth much great than the 'arbitrarily' soil definition of 25 cm 50cm depth which makes it a moorland, a geographic feature.  The citations in the article for notability define the area prior to the "road racing course" and a motor-cycle scrambles course also existed on the site which is greater than just a  "small corner on a mountain course."  agljones(talk)19:30, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Not so. --Doncram (talk) 21:39, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment. To the couple good faith editors who have read the page and think it is about a noteworthy geographic feature, could you please you yourself consult and cite any source which says it is an area of open moorland or whatever.  It has been debated at length at the talk page and in previous RFC and in long, slow edit war.   IMHO it is crap, similar to automatic assertions along similar lines for other Isle of Man racing course stuff over many years.  What matters is GNG.  Please be specific about what source says what that you believe.  Wikipedia is not a valid source, you can't just rely upon this article as the source for what you believe.  It is all contended, controversial, fraudulent. :) --Doncram (talk) 21:39, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment For the clarification for other editors, in respect to the comment by edit  of 20:43, 30 December 2017  by editor User:Atsme ;- the List article is not the ".....main article of the course."   If the editors did read all the talk page comments, then there is no censuses in the redirect to the List article over the "merge" to the "Snaefell Mountain Course" article. After a good faith attempt to resolve the long outstanding issue of independent notability WP:N issues of Circular reporting (feedback loop) and Confirmation Bias for the "Snaefell Mountain Course" article,  this main article has now been renamed Mountain Course (motorcycle racing) by another editor, ignoring the common name of Isle of Man TT Mountain Course or TT CourseWP:COMMONNAME. The main article is the now  this article "Mountain Course (motorcycle racing)" and has never been the List article.   Any editor that has directed or redirected this article to List article has been disruptive. The revised article of edit of 16:47, 30 December 2017  has reverted approximately to the  'status quo'   of an open ended set of remarks by the same editor User:Drmies in regard to the edit (RfC) of 18:11, 23 February 2015 . agljones(talk)20:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Preliminary comment. The name is NOT  Isle of Man TT Mountain course, and never has been. I have voluntarily abstained from WP for some months, partly due to one hostile editor (elsewhere) and to demonstrate that no admin has any block-threat sanction against me regarding WP:OUTing and WP:HOUNDing (I can and will 'walk away'); this latter aspect is, however (here and here) preventing me from correctly top-templating (only to be used with the prior sanction of an admin???). Also articles authored by Agljones using sources not available to the public when autopatrolled (removed by Callanecc at sock-unblock, July 2015). Digest my edit summary, then note the source retro-added in the next change, 6 years after the actual article content. My claims since 2015 (roughly co-incident with the bureaucrat (knowingly) removing CoI content, after repeated attempts by IP addresses in violation of Callanecc's unblock requirement) are not spurious.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 04:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment Editors would advise that the USER:doncram should refer back to the relevant Brandywell, Isle of Man in respect to the issue of citations and verifiability WP:V and editors should not use spurious COI claims on these various talk pages to block discussion, specifically after being given a final warning.


 * The objections from Editor User:doncram may be considered as another  “laundry list” which is again very short on evidence.  In regard to the land purchase in 1933  from the UK Crown and Treasury  in the article,  the 1984 Forestry Act in respect to granting public access refers to “….uncultivated mountain or moorland….” to distinguish different types of land use above the 250 metre map contour ‘Mountain Line.’ The status of WP:GEOLAND is in respect to being previously occupied and its “legal status”  as a recognised place may be identified by the 2016 Isle of Man TT Road Closing order. It would be also  incorrect  to infer (ie Original Research WP:OP) that this section of the  original turf road (c 1600) is the same as current A18 Snaefell Mountain Road as the “….small corner….” only dates from 1910/1922 (1933/35) as it is the most extensively modified section of the 'course.' agljones(talk)22:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment Again, editors may advise that not to either disrupt or block discussions with “laundry lists” with little or no evidence which may be seen as ‘supermarket shopping.’


 * The 2017 Isle of Man TT Regulations refer to the “COURSE” as the “Isle of Man Tourist Trophy Mountain Circuit.” The 1958 Isle of Man TT Regulations also refer to the “Isle of Man Tourist Trophy Mountain Circuit” and editors would again advise to refer to the appropriate BRD discussion.  The 2016 Road Racing Act refers to the “Tourist Trophy Mountain Course” and the “Isle of Man Tourist Trophy motorcycle races.”  The UK newspaper “Daily Express,” with a large national circulation refers to the “Isle of Man Tourist Trophy Mountain Course”  on page 38, Friday 7th  September 1979 which passes the process of independent notability WP:N, as a secondary source independent of the subject for this article.


 * The term “Snaefell Mountain Course” in the List Article is difficult to define or locate and the very small number of sources for this term and are as  Wikipedia describes as  “trivial,” contradictory or the result of Circular reporting.  The term has not attracted reporting over a long period compared to “Isle of Man TT Mountain Course”  WP:SUSTAINED.   The Windy Corner, Isle of Man  has attracted attention over a long period of time in publications due to its connection with the Isle of Man TT races, the Isle of Man TT Mountain Course and as recently as May 2017, again the subject is found in an Isle of Man walking guide.agljones(talk)19:55, 5 January 2018 (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.