Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of abandoned properties in Hayden, 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 merge to Hayden, Arizona. ✗plicit 12:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of abandoned properties in Hayden, Arizona[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)

WP:CFORK of Hayden, Arizona, created because "The contents on the article: Hayden, Arizona was written by me and a certain user has continued to remove some of it. " (quoted from the talk page). To be more precise, the contents were removed repeatedly by two different editors, and instead of trying to discuss this at the talk page (or using dispute resolution), the creator decided to make this separate article to be able to show their pictures anyway. No reason to have a separate article for this, this belongs in the main article on Hayden, or doesn't belong on Wikipedia at all. Fram (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep-As I stated before the article should not be deleted because the content in the Hayden, Arizona article was originally written by me. I have tried to include some of my images there, however a certain editor continued to remove them. That is why I wrote this article and used the information which I had created in the first place. he article is about how a prosperous mining town is becoming a "Ghost town" in modern times and the images that I took and added serve to proof my point. Thank you.Tony the Marine (talk) 09:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any relevant information to Hayden, Arizona. Creating a second article isn't the way to fix a content dispute, otherwise we'd have three versions of every article in WP. But I'm not impressed at the cooperativity going on at Hayden, Arizona; Magnolia677, Marine 69-71, BlueSingularity it would be most helpful if could all use the talk page rather than revert one another with gnomic edit-summaries. It might be possible to find a compromise solution between an inappropriate large gallery of images, and complete removal of a relevant section on the economic decline. Elemimele (talk) 13:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back to where it was taken from, no need to split it off to a separate article, it all fits nicely there. Dream Focus 14:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any relevant prose that is not redundant into Hayden, Arizona but without the images. WP is not a forum to post ones own photos. Galleries belong on commons. MB 14:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any relevant text. The section I deleted about the economic decline was mostly a duplicate of text already in the article. However, do not unbalance this article with a list of non-notable buildings. If any builldings are listed on the NRHP, then sure. Also, do not add back the image gallery of non-notable buildings. Many of us could fill some articles with photos from our personal collections, but a consensus of editors who wrote WP:IG felt this would not improve articles. Perhaps Marine 69-71 could better familiarize themself with the Commons, and the photo-sharing and gallery options available there. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge It is encyclopedic to briefly describe the fact that the town has shrunk and many buildings have been abandoned, with a couple illustrations. It is not encyclopedic to list names and photos of a dozen+ generic non-notable buildings that happen to no longer be occupied and I'm surprised the long-time editor who made this didn't realize that, nor that it's inappropriate to create a new article when your content is removed from the main one. Reywas92^Talk 14:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge As per Elemimele. MrsSnoozyTurtle 03:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Hayden, Arizona since there's zero reason to have a separate fork article for this. Although with the caveat that the merge not include the gallery, maybe just a few specific buildings. Otherwise the article won't be balanced. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:02, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Hayden, Arizona which will make a better merged page. Add a section about decline of Hayden. Gusfriend (talk) 08:20, 24 January 2022 (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.