Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gateley, California

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. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gateley, California[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Durham's "Place-Names of the San Francisco Bay Area" calls it a locality. Satellite photo shows a railroad siding. No hits indicating notability of any sort. Now part of Pinole, could do a redirect but not sure why anyone would search for it. Glendoremus (talk) 05:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete Topos show a passing siding, not a town. It's hard to imagine that this was ever considered distinct from SF itself, as it's a rock's throw from Nob Hill. Mangoe (talk) 13:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:00, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:00, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DMySon 04:42, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly nothing more than an old railroad siding. Not mentioned in the Gately article that I can tell, so no use in redirecting there. Hog Farm _Bacon 04:46, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.