Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pig Island (Arkansas)

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pig Island (Arkansas)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unverifiable, I can't find no reliable sources indicating the existence or location of this island. Many sources on the web, but all maps show a stretch of forested land, not an island, and many of these sources (type "fallingrain") have been shown to be totally unreliable and copy their errors from the same original faulty database. Fram (talk) 08:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article has since been changed from "an island" to "a community", but, while it is apparentluy listed as a "geographic name" in the GNIS database, I see no evidence at all that it is a community either... Fram (talk) 10:47, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And, without further sources, it is now back to being an island[1]. If there isn't even a single reliable source indicating what "pig island" actually is, then I don't think we should have an article on it. Even among unreliable sources, the supposed fact that it is an island in Crosstie Slough is hardly reported: [2]. Fram (talk) 11:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Fram: I don't have a stake in this AFD. I did notice it and did try to improve the Pig Island article, which had and has very little. I disbelieved that it was an island, partly because of your comment about it not appearing to be an island in your map view. I temporarily was thinking (incorrectly) that all GNIS locations were communities, and put that in, but i worried that might not be correct. Then I found my way to the GNIS listing which does clearly identify it as an island, and explains in its definition of an island that that could be in a swampy / lowland area. And by map research I see that it appears to be within Crosstie Slough. I also tried looking in historical New York Times database and a couple other behind-paywall sources, and didn't find much. I reply because I don't want you to think that I or anyone else was editing with a point of view. I was simply trying to improve the article and, as it turned out, I didn't get very far, but I did correct my mistake and I believe the small amount added, net, is correct. --do ncr am 00:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:14, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, oh okay. I thought it was a very bizarre edit and made no sense to me. Thanks for the explanation. Bali88 (talk) 00:17, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There does appear to be a few mentions of it online on map sites. I would imagine it is probably a small, uninhabited island in the middle of the river. The fact that it exists is not enough for an entry. My back yard is also a geographical area. It doesn't belong on wikipedia either. Bali88 (talk) 13:36, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → Call me Hahc21 04:18, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - it seems nothing exists to verify that this is an inhabited location. Obviously if someone comes forward with something at a later date it can be instantly recreated and (with a source) would likely be far more substantial that what we have now. Doncram tried to fix it and couldn't (but has out thanks for his efforts). It really has been given every chance possible. Stalwart111 04:52, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Useless as is, shouldn't have been created in this state. I'm all for stubs, but some of these geostubs are just racking up article creation counts and create confusion.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 18:54, 18 March 2014 (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.