Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanguard, 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 speedy delete. I swear these small fry failed geolands are going to haunt me in my sleep... lol Missvain (talk) 20:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vanguard, 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 "were they actually paying attention" GNIS entry, the spot is unlabelled in early topos, but when the name appears, it is placed directly under a box labelled "cotton gin". And yes, there is still a cotton grower and processing business at the same location. Mangoe (talk) 05:10, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 05:28, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 05:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete Durham p. 1122 cites the same topo map as the GNIS, but appropriately calls it a locality. Not a community, not notable. Reywas92^Talk 06:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
delete Fails WP:GEOLAND, as with the other California articles listed recently. FOARP (talk) 21:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GEOLAND, WP:GNG and any other applicable guideline Spiderone 14:51, 10 December 2020 (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.