Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (Mountains)

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. Kurykh 00:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (Mountains)

Found this with a speedy tag on it, with the following claim: "I lived, hiked and canoed the area for many years and never heard of them. I'm a mapoholic, and I've never seen these names entered on any NTS sheet or other map of the area. Perhaps the author is confused with the Christmas Mountains. No supporting references are given. The names do not appear in Alan Rayburn's "Geographical Names of New Brunswick". No such names are in the Canadian database, http://geonames.nrcan.gc.ca/ ". I do not know the truth behind this, so wanted to move it to AfD instead. No opinion from me. Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 07:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't seem notable enough. Bulldog123 10:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete unless some verifiable info is provided to show this name actualy beeing used for these mountains. I believe pretty much every geographic location can be worthy of an article, but some basic proof of existance should be a minimum requirement. Maybe this is a case of an alternative unofficial local name or something, but if that's the case it makes a poor choice for the article title. Since is does now show up in any maps or databases over mountains in the area and we don't know theyr supposed location (so we could check if there is anything with a different official name there) I'd say delete this as unverifiable at this time. --Sherool (talk) 11:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per Sherool, appears to be entirely unsourceable. In fact, the IP who argues for deletion on the article's talk makes a much better case for the mountains not existing than the article does for the opposite. Dina 13:04, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can find no evidence. This appears to be about as non-notable a name for a group of mountains as it's possible to get. However, one registered editor did make edits to the article that suggests some knowledge: [1] I'll let User:Plasma east know this discussion is taking place. SilkTork 13:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Goldom. Thanks for the afd warning SilkTork. I standardized this article and categorized it many months ago during an editing blitz for New Brunswick stub articles, but didn't verify the information at the time. The Christmas Mountains do exist and consist of the following peaks: North Pole Mountain, Mount St. Nicholas, Mount Blitzen, Mount Donder, Mount Dancer, Mount Dasher, Mount Vixen, Mount Prancer, and Mount Comet. The names and location can be seen on this map: http://www.snb.ca/atlas/21O02F.pdf? or verified through the geonames.nrcan.gc.ca website. I would suggest a straight delete of this article, or possibly create a redirect to a new entry for the Christmas Mountains, since these peaks contained an ecologically significant old growth forest that was logged with great controversy by Repap during the mid-1990s.Plasma east 14:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I just realized that a Christmas Mountains article currently exists, so either a redirect, or to prevent confusion, straightforward delete.Plasma east 14:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with the lack of info and sources, probably merge this to New Brunswick or Miramichi.--JForget 01:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and replace with a mention in an appropriate article Corpx 03:10, 14 August 2007 (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.