Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shantytown, Nevada

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 16:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shantytown, Nevada[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)

Doing WP:BEFORE I found some evidence that there is a place that exists called Shantytown, but it does not seem to have any legal recognition and the best I could find for it is an obituary where the person is from Shantytown. All other references seem to be as a location for Ruby Lake Campgrounds, but regardless I cannot find anything that pushes it across WP:GEOLAND.(Nomination withdrawn) snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 18:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 18:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:40, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
comment Well, looking at the topos and aerials, there is definitely a settlement at the location given. But here's the other thing: the topos consistently label it "Shanty Town". I'm suspicious that this is another case along the lines of such GNIS classics as Headquarters, Arizona and Road Junction Windmill, Arizona: it may be just a shanty town, not a place named "Shanty Town". At any rate I couldn't find anything substantial that I could be sure was about this place. Mangoe (talk) 03:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given discovery of good reporting (albeit local) we should keep this article. Mangoe (talk) 15:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is this 1993 Elko Daily Free Press article that describes the origins. There is also a 1994 article: part1 part 2. There is also a 2002 article about preventing wildland fires at Shantytown. Carlson's Nevada Place Names says that it is/was a small settlement. Shantytown is not listed in Gamett and Paher's Nevada Post Offices. Shantytown is not listed in the WPA Origin of Nevada Place Names. I agree that this location is not legally recognized, so #2 of WP:GEOLAND is not met. There are at least two articles in a WP:RS source, though they seem a bit light. I'm on the fence, I could argue either way. I'll wait and see what other editors have. Cxbrx (talk) 05:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cxbrx - My issue here is that both of these articles are in the same source (Elko Free Press) but at the same time, yeah, it does look like there's an article to be written here so I'm leaning keep. I'll try to edit the article based on these sources and see where that gets us. Entirely sympathise with snood1205 on this one, though, because there are way, way, way too many of these garbage content-less stubs and something like this really should never have been created. Wikipedia is not a gazetteer. FOARP (talk) 09:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Turns out the 1994 story was just a re-run of the same 1993 piece so I discarded it, but the 1993 story plus the 2002 story, plus some additional sources, just about gets this one over the notability line in that it's possible to write a narrative history of the place. Is it very notable? No, clearly not - it's a place where maybe 10-15 people live permanently - but notability has never been a very high bar which makes the failure of so many of these mass-produced stubs to meet it even more damning. Thanks especially to Cxbrx's newspaper sources. FOARP (talk) 10:39, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Really nice work here in finding these sources Cxbrb! I did not come across these in my WP:BEFORE so feel free to trout me. These do seem like enough for a keep to me. I'm unsure at this point if I can withdraw with Mangoe's comment, but if it is still an option I would withdraw. snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 12:51, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mangoe - are you OK for snood1205 to withdraw? FOARP (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there seems to be enough documentation here. Mangoe (talk) 15:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to FOARP for editing the article, I was not sure if I wanted to put in the time if the article was to be deleted. I also feel that including the references in the deletion article is a good practice because they are preserved for future editors. I agree that the second article was basically a reprint and I probably should have noted that. Snood1205: thank you for the offer of a trouting (which would be my first trouting!), but I'm still a bit on the fence on this one, so I see the value of having a discussion. If this place was a fishing camp in Delaware, would it pass? I'm not so sure. However, for me, the fact that there are multiple articles helps meet the requirements. I do think this is a borderline case and different editors at a different time might feel differently. As perhaps I've written in the past, notability might also depend on isolation, for example, a phone booth in the middle of nowhere might be notable, whereas each phone booth in a bank at an airport is probably not notable. The same perhaps goes for communities - the only community for a great distance is perhaps notable whereas a burbclave that is adjacent to many other burbclaves might not be notable. This is just my opinion... Cxbrx (talk) 16:24, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes GNG.Djflem (talk) 15:26, 9 December 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.