Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Valley, Iowa

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. Sandstein 20:33, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Green Valley, Iowa[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)

Non-notable and unreferenced former place. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 00:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 00:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GEOLAND. WestCD (talk) 01:05, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how WP:GEOLAND applies. This isn't a populated place, nor a disputed region, nor a natural feature. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 03:28, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:55, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not appear in GNIS (only as a valley in another county); unverified lines do not pass GEOLAND just because it uses the word "town". Newspapers.com results are all about a golf course. Recreation welcome if WP:V is satisfied. Reywas92^Talk 07:18, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this unsourced rubbish. What is with this "a very large number of people". As best I can tell the place in question never exceeded 1 black smith shop and "2 lodges", by the time people moved to Green Valley the other place had already lost population, and Green Valley was just one of three places the people moved to. Wikipedia requires verrification which we have none of here.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:54, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It was plainly a rural community recognized in the area, per the sourcing I quickly added. I do not see it in GNIS or on any USGS maps (apparently too rural an area to have detailed USGS maps when the name was in more common use in the early 20th century).--Milowent • ^hasspoken 16:18, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed you added some sourcing — do you think the article should be kept? Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 06:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is my personal opinion, as a "populated places without legal recognition", but since it is not in GNIS, I figured I would just see how the consensus develops. It is amazing how unpopulated much of the United States is.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 18:36, 7 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.