Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manila, 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 speedy keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) b uidhe 23:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Manila, Arizona

[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)

Yet another siding. There was a schoolhouse here (now abandoned) and some trackside structures (presumably a station and outbuildings, now gone) and that's it, except for the Jack Rabbit Trading Post, whose website doesn't mention Manila. Searching is a bear due to many further opportunities for clickbait and by a visit of the battleship Arizona to the Philippines at some point,, so it's possible I've missed something. Mangoe (talk) 23:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There was a post office and school district (which led to a protracted court case). By the 1940s there was still a collection of houses there, although this guide is quite dismissive of the opportunities for motorists. It wasn't only railroad workers who lived there. Seems like a legally recognized populated place to me.----Pontificalibus 11:55, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will withdraw this one. Mangoe (talk) 15:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not entirely convinced that the railroad worker camp and associated facilities meet our notability standards, but it's not a total nothingburger like the named sidings we've been seeing. Regarding the ranch headquarters, it's just as likely that they were using the Manila name as a general landmark for the nearby ranch. –dlthewave ☎ 19:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the evidence presented by Pontificalibus. Apparently people lived there Lightburst (talk) 20:37, 8 March 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.