Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diamond, 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 delete. czar 00:31, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Diamond, California
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Diamond, California (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No evidence of notability. Not listed in Durham's "Place Names of the San Francisco Bay Area." Shows up on 2015 Honkers Bay USGS map but not present in earlier of later versions of the quadrangle. No other hits. Glendoremus (talk) 00:04, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I found nothing in the 1917 and 1940 histories of Contra Costa County. It is present on the 1908 Antioch USGS map but not on other maps I checked. It was likely just the name of a railroad station, as the nearby town of Pittsburg was named "Black Diamond" at the time. −−− Cactus Jack 🌵 01:27, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- delete Well, this is a new one on me: the first GNIS entry I've found copied from a nautical chart. And yes, the spot is still labelled on the current edition of the chart, but there just is not and never has been anything there: it's an area between two rail lines which join just to the west (the GNIS location is conspicuously wrong, BTW: it's too far south), now occupied by a factory. It seems obvious to me that a nautical chart isn't a reliable source for anything not nautical, but apparently the GNIS compilers thought otherwise, or more likely didn't consider the question. Mangoe (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
- 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.