Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Little Penny, 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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:03, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Little Penny, 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)

Another isolated "name on a map" case in Mendocino County, the only thing close to a reference to it I found was a mindat.org entry for a relatively nearby copper mine. I'm not too sure because it's another surprisingly common phrase, but the overall hit count was pretty low even so. Mangoe (talk) 19:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I was gonna nominate this earlier, but didn't get around this. I came to the conclusion that this could possibly be a natural feature, as all I could find was references to literal little pennies and a few uses of it as a nickname. Hog Farm _Talk 01:00, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems to just be a stretch of forest road. I think this is some sort of paper town Agloe, New York type of place that exists solely as a location on a map.--🌀Kieran207-talk 🌀 01:20, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I found speculation outwith Wikipedia that it was a small copper mine, and a play on words, but that's all that it was, speculation. There is nothing that I can find that says what this subject even is, and aerial photographs show that this 1-sentence article, written in the present tense, is false on its face. Uncle G (talk) 11:01, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nom and assesment done per above. Purosinaloense T/K 18:16, 17 April 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.