Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cote, West Sussex

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The result was withdrawn‎. Improvements to the article have been made which address the original concerns. It appears as if local editors have access to offline and or very local resources which alleviates the original concerns. PicturePerfect666 (talk) 15:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cote, West Sussex

[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)

No evidence to suggest such a neighbourhood or suburb going by this name actually exists. It appears to be a name given to an area by someone but this has no sourcing or any other verification to support such a neighbourhood or suburb actually existing. Yes lots of pictures are on wikicommons but that is not evidence or viefication. PicturePerfect666 (talk) 16:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well this makes a change from the GNIS mess. Interestingly, this is on the Ordnance Survey maps at exactly the coördinates that GeoHack passes through. It's in the same typeface as Clapham and a larger typeface than Clapham Common (which is not Clapham Common), whatever that signifies. (Mangoe?) So it does exist, at least. It's going to be difficult to find history with a word like that, though. Hmmm. Victoria History, maybe. Uncle G (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- And indeed Victoria History it was. Uncle G (talk) 18:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, ~~or merge with Worthing~~. It really does exist, even if you want to ignore the Commons photos of it, or its name on the OS map. It was not big enough to be notable in the 19th century, because Worthing was still small, and not yet the town that it is today (so no mention in VCH), but there may well be mentions of it in 20th/21st-century newspapers, whose archives are not yet online. So this one is a waiting game, with no improvement to WP if its existing information and links were deleted. Whatever we do, we should keep the location, information, details and links. Storye book (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Now that some authoritative evidence has been added to the article (thank you, Uncle G), I believe that there is now no case for deletion. Storye book (talk) 19:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That says "coates" and is next to a place called "holt". Does this place actually exist today, or is this singular map actually authoritative and where is the rest of the sourcing for this place to exist? I understand a map is great but is is accurate? Where are the sources of this place being mentioned and where is the evidence it exists today? PicturePerfect666 (talk) 19:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (prompted partly by local knowledge) I will leave it to those familiar with the nuances of Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features)#Settlements and administrative regions to make the final decision on this, but I can offer the following:
- As per the Victoria County History sources added by Uncle G, Cote was historically a hamlet within the parish of Durrington; if "Merge" is the outcome, the Durrington article should be the destination.
- Care should be taken not to confuse it with the nearby village of Coates, West Sussex.
- It was sometimes known as "Walcote" in the medieval period (see VCH reference): this may assist with source-finding.
- The 1898 OS map shows its extent and its relationship to Durrington parish. The number of buildings has not really changed since then.
- I have thoroughly reviewed all my Sussex and Worthing book sources: 10 Worthing-specific books and about 25 Sussex-related including the likes of Lucas's Highways and Byways of Sussex, the West Sussex Village Book, An Historical Atlas of Sussex, Worthing − From Saxon Settlement to Seaside Town, Worthing − Aspects of Change, Church and Parish of Durrington and Millennium Encyclopaedia of Worthing History, each of which is very comprehensive. Sadly there is very little indeed. Millennium Encyclopaedia of Worthing History states (in the "Place Names" section, p111) "Cote (or Walcote): Home of William de la Cote c1266 or atte Cote 1296". An Historical Atlas of Sussex notes in passing (p32) the placename element "cote" without referring to this Cote specifically. The 65-page Church and Parish of Durrington, a comprehensive parish history since Domesday, mentions nothing; nor do any of the others.
- On request I can supply further details of the books I have consulted. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 20:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Have a look for the flint pits. I haven't yet found a good source for the flint pit excavation at Cotes Bottom, just hints. I'm working from zero knowledge of any of this, by the way. I keep checking the Ordnance Survey map to ensure that what I'm turning up in the histories is the right place. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 20:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - Worthing − From Saxon Settlement to Seaside Town has quite a lot of detail (pp8–10) about the flint mines in the area, but Cote is not mentioned. Representative quote: Flint mining clearly became an integral part of the activities of these early farming communities. The flint mines at Church Hill (Findon), Blackpatch, Harrow Hill and Cissbury, estimated to have been in existence prior to 3700 BC, are among the earliest in Britain. An extract from the Yeakell and Gardner map you have cited in the article is also shown, although only a section east of Cote. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 21:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      - I have passing mentions of "Gaster's Pit 17, Cote Bottom, Durrington, Sussex" and there's obviously a archaeological/geological report out there somewhere to be had. Uncle G (talk) 21:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Looks like it was once a recognised hamlet, so meets
WP:GEOLAND. Whether it is a separate settlement today or not is utterly irrelevant. Once notable, always notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:19, 14 November 2023 (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.