Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Havana, Oregon

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Havana, Oregon

Havana, Oregon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
aka Havana Station
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PROD was removed without comment, but this place is obviously non-notable and never was. Sources consist of GNIS (not sufficient for notability) and a trivial one-word mention in a 1913 magazine ("The first section extends from Pendleton to Havana station, a distance of eight miles"). Satellite view shows empty farmland; topo maps from the 1930s suggest this was never a community but rather a rail siding possibly with a flag stop for local farmers. That is a far cry from a "community" and the article thus fails

WP:GEOLAND. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment: for anyone who isn't sure why GNIS data is considered unreliable (like me before I googled it), see Wikipedia:Reliability_of_GNIS_data Mrfoogles (talk) 17:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless anyone can find at least one reliable source describing this: in an ideal world there would be another source that this wasn't a town but the fact that no one can find any mentions of it outside of GNIS means that it fails GNG, and is impossible to write an article about, anyway. Topo map review is also convincing, so probably not an actual place. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A few notes: I created this article 15 years ago, in good faith, when GNIS was considered a reliable source (and was acceptable to determine if something was a "
civility quotient in these AfDs. Think a place article needs deletion? Propose solutions! Where might the info fit better? Is the county article the best place to put a random blurp about a place? Also make sure you are doing the required redlink cleanup. Do quality work. If it's a bullshit place, it's a bullshit place
. Most of these articles aren't that.
Request: someone please link me to "I peered at the map and determined the truth about this place" policy, as that seems to be
WP:FUTON is roughly applicable. At some point I'll add this info to an article about the Pendleton Branch line of the Union Pacific Railroad as that is the reason this place exists. I need to check in with the railroad folks. Building an encyclopedia takes time. Cheers, Valfontis (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2024 (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.