Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scroggins Draw, Texas

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. ✗plicit 23:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scroggins Draw, Texas[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)

This article seems to fail WP:NPLACE given almost no information beyond statistics and coordinates is mentioned. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per this source,
Scoggins Draw, you should know, is not the name of a town. It’s the name of a valley. And there is no town in the valley of Scroggins Draw. There is no … anything in Scroggins Draw.
That's the most comprehensive bit of information I could find. Per topographic maps, it's a dry wash in the desert, not a populated place and certainly not a "community" as the county template says. Therefore, the article is a falsehood. Yes, it's the point where two interstates meet. But that's not a community or populated place, and unless there's something particularly special about this desert interchange, the article needs to be deleted as a failure of WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 21:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's the name of a valley, not a settled place, and the article has never claimed to be about a settled place, so WP:GEOLAND/WP:NPLACE doesn't have anything to do with this article. WierdNAnnoyed's article mentioned above also helps establish its notability as a WP:GEONATURAL location. Its primary usage appears to be to be as the location of the western terminus of Interstate 20 in my searches, and appears as such in the first sentence of the Interstate 20 article, among other things. RecycledPixels (talk) 22:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article ~~includes~~ included the Template:Reeves County, Texas template, which called the place a community, which is obviously wrong, which may have led to the confusion above. I've removed that entry from that template and removed that template from the article. RecycledPixels (talk) 22:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean having exactly one notable thing about it does not really satisfy WP:GEONATURAL either, let alone WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous (talk) 02:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even if it's a valley and not a town, we need more than just a name to justify an article. I don't see any sources of substance, even with the lower bar of GeoNatural. Reywas92^Talk 02:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per WP:GEONATURAL which states a named natural feature could be notable "provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist" and "The number of known sources should be considered to ensure there is enough verifiable content for an encyclopedic article" This article is virtually just stating coordinates and nothing else. AusLondonder (talk) 16:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to the I20 article The argument that this shouldn't be kept is a slam dunk, but it seems more sensible to redirect itJames.folsom (talk) 00:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

James.folsom, can you provide a link to the "I20 article"? Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still would like to see a link to this "I20 article" mentioned in the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have the link to Interstate 20 in my "keep" statement above. RecycledPixels (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Roads to see if anybody there has highway sources that can be used to satisfy the lack of sourcing mentioned above. RecycledPixels (talk) 22:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, RecycledPixels, I don't know how I missed that! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - the article definitely needs more information. When I do a Google search on Scroggins Draw, there are numerous returns for a Scroggins Draw in Colorado. — Maile (talk) 00:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This one is in texas not colorado. James.folsom (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The articles for I10 and I20 already note that their intersection is known as Scroggin's Draw, which is all of the information that can be gleaned from this article - so there's nothing to merge or redirect to. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete but not redirect per above as neither I10 nor I20 should be considered a primary target. Instead footnotes can be added to their appearance in the I10 and I20 articles using the fwtx.com article as a ref. (I would suggest DAB instead if the Colorado version in Dinosaur National Monument were at all reliably sourceable as having been an official name -- but it isn't[1]) ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 09:14, 25 April 2024 (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.