Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angell, Arizona (2nd nomination)

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:04, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Angell, Arizona

AfDs for this article:

[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 "populated place" does not meet GEOLAND or GNG, and assertions to the contrary in the previous AfD are based on a misunderstanding of the actual guideline. The article conflates three separate things, none of which are populated places or otherwise notable:

Angell Grazing Allotment: This is simply a USFS cattle grazing area.
Angell Focus: This is a Hohokam cultural group that lived in the area, but the source does not indicate a specific settlement at this location.
Angell railroad siding: Newspapers mention this only in the context of a railroad watering/maintenance stop. There is no evidence that this was considered a populated place, and it doesn't have sufficient coverage to meet GNG.

Other arguments include the fact that Angell appears on current and historic official maps. However,

WP:NGEO explicitly excludes maps when considering notability; appearance on a map does not constitute "legal recognition"; and as we've found countless times they are often either mistaken or are actually showing a landmark rather than a settlement. This appears to be yet another GNIS error, as no other source calls this a populated place. –dlthewave ☎ 04:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Arizona. –dlthewave ☎ 04:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
delete All I can find are plats of the turning wye which is still there. I find no reference to a town and the other stuff has nothing to do with this spot. Mangoe (talk) 04:44, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:35, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question here. While it does appear to be gone now, the newspaper mention listed in the source is pretty clear that, at least as published in the 40s, this was indeed a settlement. It's coordinates are exactly as described, a 'small settlement just east of Flagstaff in the lava country'. Is there any reason to believe that newspaper clipping ( https://www.newspapers.com/clip/42208665/angell/ ) is incorrect? --WhoIs 127.0.0.1 ping/loopback 12:53, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make the point absolutely here so the comment is not taken as a keep vote, even if the source is accurate its probably trivial (the article its clipped from is just a list going over pronunciation and etymology of some places near Flagstaff). I'm just honestly curious if this is all a big misunderstanding or if it did exist at one time. --WhoIs 127.0.0.1 ping/loopback 13:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This appears to have been a railroad watering/maintenance stop, which included a bunkhouse - I believe that is why there are occasional references to this being a "settlement". That does not make it a populated place. MB 20:07, 3 November 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.