Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nakunta River (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist (t) 04:56, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nakunta River

[edit]
AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Nakunta River (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This was last AFD'd in 2009 by User:Fences and windows and pretty much everything they wrote in their 2009 nom was basically correct on this: there is nothing that can be written about this river as no sources give it anything more than a passing mention. The sources cited in the article are a link to mapcarta that does not obviously show the river (linking to Mapcarta actually triggered the block filter on Wikipedia, which tells you all you need to know about the quality of that source), a tour guide that only briefly mentions the river, and an atlas (i.e., a map). Per WP:NGEO maps cannot establish the notability of a geographic feature. The other sources provided in the 2009 AFD are all passing mentions or maps. A search in GBooks and similar sources also failed to turn up anything but passing mentions. The 2009 keep !voters were under the impression that Wikipedia is a gazetteer per se and that any geographic feature should have an article - but Wikipedia is not a gazetteer (it might have features of one, but that's a different thing) and we do not have articles about non-notable geographic features just because they exist. For the record, had I seen this in 2009 I might well have voted the same way as them, so this is not a judgement on the keep !voters. FOARP (talk) 20:23, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Fences and windows. I just realised that my pinging of you might be interpreted as WP:CANVASS so for balance I will ping all the other 2009 participants: @Carlossuarez46, Reyk, DGG, BalthCat, Drmies, John Z, Chrajohn, Mandsford, Nyttend, Milowent, and Joe Chill:. Apologies if this is of no interest guys. FOARP (talk) 08:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have only the faintest memory of this very ancient AfD but I think I agree with my younger self. This is one of those horrendous little microstubs that appear when completionism meets a total lack of content. I'd say the best thing to do is merge/redirect into a list of Honduras geographical features. Alternatively Caratasca Lagoon, as suggested by F&W, sounds to me like a good option. Reyk YO! 09:23, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • redirect to Caratasca as nom per Fences and Windows. FOARP (talk) 09:31, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: While this editor is now kinder and gentler than he was in 2009, I still weep for those who lack the curiosity to become fluent in Spanish and travel to the libraries in Tegucigalpa to find additional sourcing for this article. Such as the informative "Monografia de las cuencas de los Rios Ibantara, Guarunta, Nakunta y Cruta"[1] published in 1988 by R. H. Stover. I added a few more sources and a map of the outlet area nonetheless. Wikipedia's coverage of some areas of the world is still sparse after 20 years of development. For example, the village of Mocorón in this area (which lays west of the Nakunta basin) clearly has long existed and been written about, but we have no article on it, only one on the nearby airport.--Milowent • hasspoken 18:25, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the effort here Milowent but the sources added appear to be passing mentions - refugees camped near the river, a bridge will be built over the river, in both cases the subject is not the river nor is the river really discussed at all. Whilst I too greatly regret that we will not have the benefit of reading the words of the great Stover, it seems (from my lamentably poor Spanish) that the topic may have been somewhat tangential to the river itself. It seems the GNG pass we're looking for is out of our grasp. FOARP (talk) 18:44, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't a lot of effort to find those, I am sure there is more to be found. That one book appears to be a study of the basins of four rivers (including the Nakunta). As a practical matter, I can't imagine how Wikipedia is benefited by not having an article on this river vs. merging the identical content into some sub-heading under the stub for Caratasca Lagoon, which everyone seems to be agree is notable.--Milowent • hasspoken 19:13, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. references have been added. They are enough of a basis for a stub. If we found two sources here in a few hours, there will be more. For example, have we looked at school textbooks used in the country? The only hope of making this information generally available is to accumulate it in WP Presumably there are WPedians in Honduras--have we tried to contactthem? DGG ( talk ) 18:54, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This article has been up since 2009 and already went through AFD once before with only passing mentions found. As no ES Wiki article exists, it seems our Honduran colleagues have not attempted an article, though the Honduras project has been notified. FOARP (talk) 20:45, 10 November 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nakunta_River_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1055673332"