Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faggot Hill

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. Hog Farm _Talk 06:16, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Faggot Hill[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)

It's highly arguable that the hill in question passes WP:GEOLAND since it is, by the article's admission, "the 985th highest summit in Massachusetts," surrounded exclusively by much more notable features in the Mountains of Massachusetts category. Google News returns four articles for the phrase "Faggot Hill" in quotes, none of which are related to this particular summit. The article itself offers no insight into the hill's significance beyond its paltry ranking in the state's highest peaks. It is, to put it bluntly, a small, non-notable hillock that seems to have earned an article by virtue of its "funny" name, which has also made it the target of a disproportionate amount of vandalism since its creation. MasqueDesRonces (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – In all likelihood the only reason this article was created is its unusual name. I don't even know if it could pass WP:GEOLAND because very little information beyond "statistics and coordinates" exists. Ovinus (talk) 02:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This hill does not appear to be notable merely as a hill, nor does it even seem to be notable for being the subject of a controversy over its name. Perhaps the hill and its name aren't famous enough for most local residents to even know what it is officially named. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:06, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:11, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:11, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Eeeesh. We don't have an article for "Nigger Pond" in Plymouth either. The sourcing is suspect as well, FWIW; the USGS site has little more than "It exists," and upon what basis is "peakery.com" a reliable source? Ravenswing 14:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Good point, which I failed to mention. Peakery seems to be a social network for mountaineers, hikers, etc. relying mostly on user-submitted info, so no, not especially reliable by WP standards; the USGS source is the only credible one. MasqueDesRonces (talk) 15:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's now been deleted from Peakery (Wayback Machine capture from November, live page returning a 404 error), presumably for the same reasons that prompted this AfD, which bring the total sources for this article to... one. --MasqueDesRonces (talk) 15:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is the 969th highest place in Massachusetts, a state with few significant mountains to begin with, there is nothing even close to making it notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually the 985th highest peak. The 969 figure is a popular bit of stealth vandalism that IPs re-add every so often... :/ --MasqueDesRonces (talk) 16:55, 25 January 2021 (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.