749:
still tend to be limited to the same possibly machine-generated text, with various mechanical improvements over the years but nothing done to improve the content. And to be fair, I have to think that when these articles were laid in, nobody appreciated the problems with relying solely on GNIS. But now we have these articles, and we know the problems, and the data does not become inarguable simply because it comes from a site with a .gov domain. At present, the discussion of place notability is, if anything, leaning towards getting stricter in its adherence to the primary guidelines, just as school notability was tightened (and that against my opinion, I would note). I also have to point out that, by and large, there's no significant information being lost in deleting an article whose sole source is GNIS, and if someone put together a better article using other sources, it would most likely survive an AfD challenge; more likely than not, there wouldn't even be a challenge. If you really want to object, start an RFC; but you've shown up enough times in these discussions to be aware of the issues that are driving the campaign.
721:. And I don't like the ongoing campaign to delete places articles in the U.S. It is succeeding in pushing out a number of valid topics without them being defended, and others are being fought over before they end up being Kept. Most nominations in this drive are "achieving" Delete outcome. I for one don't like the drill; this is either forcing a lot of editors to do on-line research quickly without access to local libraries and their history files, etc., or it is losing the articles so not serving readers and making it harder for anyone in the future. These all are places listed in GNIS or whatever; it would be okay and far better than this to stop the compaign. --
743:
to miss being told over and over that GNIS's designations of "populated places" reflect a lack of care in the collecting, compounded by terminology which they use to mean something other than what the words themselves actually mean. Look, this service station is something of a borderline case. I am
699:
There has been a tendency to give any place that can be verified as a settlement something of a pass on GNG requirements, for better or worse. The issue, which I raised in the nomination and which seems to be being addressed, is that, as the service station that it is, whether or not it meets the
748:
lines. But a place with population it is not, and the evidence is that it never was. And the campaign is necessary, from my perspective, because people dumped a lot of crap in from GNIS without reviewing it and with no apparent intent to fleshing out decent articles. After all, years later, they
763:
Poorly-sourced stubs are not always as harmless as they may seem. When I do BEFORE searches on these places, I've noticed that sources such as Google tend to repeat
Knowledge's "Unincorporated Community" description which is almost never based on a published source. We're actually creating and
52:. There is no agreement about whether this should be covered or evaluated as a place or as a company, and whether it meets the inclusion requirements for either. Discussion quality is mostly poor, as there is little serious discussion of the quality of the sources on offer.
370:, who has local writers write about their community. If you've ever seen one of those books, it lists everything that could possibly be listed in a city, mostly non-notable things such as food trucks, theaters, local shops, etc. It doesn't show
240:
Ted's Place was a gas station; even the article admits that, and that's what any reference says, other than passing mentions used to locate other spots. Is it a notable gas station? Maybe, but it isn't a settlement, and it never was.
454:
456:
464:
209:
536:
826:
and Move. Should not be listed as a place, but as a gas station/store it has some coverage, more that a typical gas station, and has some historic characteristics. The place is closely associated with
323:
I started the article because it was a red link, but if you want to delete it, that's fine with me. I don't know how red links are handled, though. Are they 'unlinked' if an article is deleted? --
395:
but notice how that latter article doesn't have any sources at all currently. Knowledge is not built by wantonly deleting good-faith contributions for no good reason. See policies such as
162:
203:
462:
277:
258:
340:
So, it's a gas station not a settlement. But that's not a reason to delete as it's still notable because it's easy to find sources which highlight it as "
109:
135:
130:
94:
461:
This location is referred to again and again as a place. Countless map books and county documents say things like "turn north at Ted's Place", such as
139:
169:
122:
476:
479:
624:
and the additional coverage found by
Editorofthewiki. Just because it's a gas station and not a town doesn't mean it's non-notable. Like
440:
A source cited in the article states that on the southern part of the settlement are "a number of log cabins built by forgotten pioneers".
814:
671:
601:
574:
250:
224:
191:
834:
as a
Colorado state representative and senator. To avoid two very small articles on barely notable topics, I would put it all in
472:
452:
89:
82:
17:
502:
It seems to receive some coverage over the years, so I guess it could be considered historic. It should probably be moved to
185:
571:
869:
848:
771:
758:
730:
709:
690:
641:
517:
490:
420:
382:
353:
332:
318:
303:
288:
269:
64:
681:
Undecided on notability, but "delete because it's not a settlement" is a poor argument when nobody's asserting it is.
181:
126:
103:
99:
700:
GNG. Personally, I'm not entirely sold that it is well-known enough on a wide enough basis to satisfy the guideline.
629:
554:, it is irrelevant if local sources refer to it as "a place". Being "a place" with a name is not sufficient to meet
784:
650:
583:
886:
416:
349:
231:
40:
466:
740:
620:
567:
118:
70:
387:
It's good that there are local historians and publishers recording the history of such places. Here's a
882:
686:
486:
36:
197:
795:
Relisting one more time to hopefully sort out whether this is being evaluated as a place or a company.
509:
412:
345:
328:
768:
625:
597:
408:
315:
217:
835:
637:
404:
367:
363:
341:
726:
555:
281:
262:
78:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
881:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
754:
705:
682:
482:
448:
246:
809:
450:
388:
375:
324:
744:
OK with others judging it to be a notable example of such, given decent arguments along
831:
765:
662:
593:
400:
312:
55:
862:
745:
633:
559:
558:, and if we're treating it as a historic building/location instead, it needs to meet
444:
396:
392:
300:
839:
722:
614:
503:
391:. The worst case would be merger of this landmark with some broader topic such as
156:
750:
701:
371:
299:
Generic local gas station, only known because it's a highway junction pit stop.
242:
799:
471:
Even though the building (which appeared to have a living area upstairs)
843:
475:, the area is still called "Ted's Place" in official county documents
877:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
787:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
653:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
586:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
311:
It's a gas station, not an "unincorporated community". –
152:
148:
144:
216:
798:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
764:
propagating bad information by keeping these stubs. –
659:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
592:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
506:
since it is a convenience station and not a town. ~
443:Ted's Place has received significant coverage, per
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
889:). No further edits should be made to this page.
276:Note: This discussion has been included in the
257:Note: This discussion has been included in the
278:list of Geography-related deletion discussions
618:per the sources in the article like from the
566:non-local coverage, of which there is none. ♠
259:list of Colorado-related deletion discussions
230:
8:
110:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
275:
256:
528:
7:
830:, who is automatically notable per
389:detailed account with more pictures
24:
541:. Trinity University Press. 2013.
95:Introduction to deletion process
632:, gas stations can be notable.
69:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
85:(AfD)? Read these primers!
906:
870:22:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
849:14:46, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
815:04:45, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
772:03:01, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
759:02:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
731:23:19, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
710:15:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
691:14:43, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
672:06:26, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
642:15:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
491:15:03, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
421:13:40, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
383:13:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
354:09:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
333:03:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
319:01:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
304:00:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
289:00:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
270:00:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
251:00:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
65:07:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
630:Shea's Gas Station Museum
602:01:42, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
575:02:06, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
538:The WPA Guide to Colorado
518:01:11, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
879:Please do not modify it.
838:and with redirects from
32:Please do not modify it.
739:It takes a bad case of
621:Fort Collins Coloradoan
473:was demolished in 1983
562:, including at least
119:Ted's Place, Colorado
83:Articles for deletion
71:Ted's Place, Colorado
626:Tramway Gas Station
793:Relisting comment:
368:Arcadia Publishing
868:
817:
674:
670:
604:
291:
272:
100:Guide to deletion
90:How to contribute
63:
897:
867:
812:
807:
797:
790:
788:
741:WP:DIDNTHEARTHAT
669:
667:
660:
658:
656:
654:
591:
589:
587:
543:
542:
533:
512:
380:
286:
267:
235:
234:
220:
172:
160:
142:
80:
62:
60:
53:
34:
905:
904:
900:
899:
898:
896:
895:
894:
893:
887:deletion review
860:: Meets GNG.--
818:
810:
800:
783:
781:
675:
663:
661:
649:
647:
605:
582:
580:
548:
547:
546:
535:
534:
530:
510:
376:
282:
263:
177:
168:
133:
117:
114:
77:
74:
56:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
903:
901:
892:
891:
873:
872:
854:
853:
852:
851:
796:
791:
780:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
734:
733:
715:
714:
713:
712:
694:
693:
657:
646:
645:
644:
590:
579:
578:
577:
545:
544:
527:
526:
522:
521:
520:
496:
495:
494:
493:
469:
459:
441:
435:
434:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
423:
357:
356:
335:
321:
306:
293:
292:
273:
238:
237:
174:
113:
112:
107:
97:
92:
75:
73:
68:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
902:
890:
888:
884:
880:
875:
874:
871:
865:
864:
859:
856:
855:
850:
847:
846:
841:
837:
833:
829:
825:
822:
821:
820:
819:
816:
813:
808:
806:
805:
794:
789:
786:
773:
770:
767:
762:
761:
760:
756:
752:
747:
742:
738:
737:
736:
735:
732:
728:
724:
720:
717:
716:
711:
707:
703:
698:
697:
696:
695:
692:
688:
684:
680:
677:
676:
673:
668:
666:
655:
652:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
623:
622:
617:
616:
610:
607:
606:
603:
599:
595:
588:
585:
576:
573:
569:
565:
561:
557:
553:
550:
549:
540:
539:
532:
529:
525:
519:
515:
514:
513:
505:
501:
498:
497:
492:
488:
484:
480:
477:
474:
470:
467:
465:
463:
460:
457:
455:
453:
451:
449:
446:
442:
439:
438:
437:
436:
433:
430:
429:
422:
418:
414:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
393:Poudre Canyon
390:
386:
385:
384:
381:
379:
373:
369:
365:
361:
360:
359:
358:
355:
351:
347:
343:
339:
336:
334:
330:
326:
322:
320:
317:
314:
310:
307:
305:
302:
298:
295:
294:
290:
287:
285:
279:
274:
271:
268:
266:
260:
255:
254:
253:
252:
248:
244:
233:
229:
226:
223:
219:
215:
211:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
183:
180:
179:Find sources:
175:
171:
167:
164:
158:
154:
150:
146:
141:
137:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
115:
111:
108:
105:
101:
98:
96:
93:
91:
88:
87:
86:
84:
79:
72:
67:
66:
61:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
878:
876:
861:
857:
844:
827:
823:
803:
801:
792:
782:
718:
678:
664:
648:
619:
612:
608:
581:
563:
551:
537:
531:
523:
508:
507:
499:
431:
409:WP:INSPECTOR
407:. See also
377:
337:
308:
296:
284:CAPTAIN RAJU
283:
265:CAPTAIN RAJU
264:
239:
227:
221:
213:
206:
200:
194:
188:
178:
165:
76:
57:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
840:Ted's Place
836:Ted Herring
828:Ted Herring
683:Smartyllama
615:Ted's Place
504:Ted's Place
483:Magnolia677
405:WP:PRESERVE
204:free images
665:Sandstein
556:WP:GEOLAND
524:References
378:Darth Mike
372:notability
325:Marjaliisa
58:Sandstein
883:talk page
766:dlthewave
594:Barkeep49
500:Weak keep
342:legendary
313:dlthewave
37:talk page
885:or in a
863:Milowent
785:Relisted
651:Relisted
634:Oakshade
613:Move to
584:Relisted
366:is from
301:Reywas92
163:View log
104:glossary
39:or in a
832:WP:NPOL
723:Doncram
679:Comment
401:WP:BITE
210:WP refs
198:scholar
136:protect
131:history
81:New to
751:Mangoe
746:WP:GNG
702:Mangoe
572:(talk)
560:WP:GNG
552:Delete
447:, see
445:WP:GNG
413:Andrew
397:WP:ATD
346:Andrew
309:Delete
297:Delete
243:Mangoe
182:Google
140:delete
225:JSTOR
186:books
170:Stats
157:views
149:watch
145:links
16:<
858:Keep
824:Keep
802:brad
755:talk
727:talk
719:Keep
706:talk
687:talk
638:talk
628:and
611:and
609:Keep
598:talk
564:some
511:EDDY
487:talk
432:Keep
417:talk
403:and
374:. --
364:link
362:The
350:talk
338:Keep
329:talk
247:talk
218:FENS
192:news
153:logs
127:talk
123:edit
568:PMC
415:🐉(
348:🐉(
232:TWL
161:– (
866:•
845:MB
842:.
811:🍁
757:)
729:)
708:)
689:)
640:)
600:)
570:♠
516:~
489:)
481:.
478:,
419:)
411:.
399:,
352:)
344:"
331:)
280:.
261:.
249:)
212:)
155:|
151:|
147:|
143:|
138:|
134:|
129:|
125:|
804:v
769:☎
753:(
725:(
704:(
685:(
636:(
596:(
485:(
468:.
458:.
327:(
316:☎
245:(
236:)
228:·
222:·
214:·
207:·
201:·
195:·
189:·
184:(
176:(
173:)
166:·
159:)
121:(
106:)
102:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.