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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buchanan Corner, Indiana[edit]

Buchanan Corner, Indiana (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)

Google incorrectly claims this to be a township, but the GHits are all clickbait except for a find-a-grave result or two; GBooks literally produces nothing but GNIS predecessors and a single hit to a county history (which does not pan out) before tossing out nonsense. The oldest topo I looked at labels a Buchanan School at the intersection, replaced in the next by the Buchanan Corner label. The coords, btw, are considerably off, as seems to be a feature of many Clay County locations. Anyway, there's nothing here and no documentation at all of the place besides the topos/GNIS. Mangoe (talk) 03:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lewis Township, Clay County, Indiana per nom. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 04:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Mangoe (talk) 11:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Without further information this is just an intersection. GNIS is nothing. Redirect makes no sense because this seems an implausible search term and there is nothing at the Lewis Township article but a mention of this place's existence in a list. Existence is not notability. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 13:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

●Comment- This is The Location of A Cemetary 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 19:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Find-a-grave is NOT a reliable source (Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Find_a_Grave and WP:FINDAGRAVE-EL) and it should not be added. The coordinates in the link you added are in the middle of a field and there's no images, so maybe don't use that?

• Delete Not a notable community, just a named intersection. Reywas92^Talk 01:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There are NO GUIDLINES stating that family cemeteries can not be mentioned in a Wikipedia article. And those cemeteries I listed prove notability, just because there is a lack of online resources does not mean there is no offline sources. The Cemeteries need to be mentioned so that users who have access to those offline sources can list them. All the information on those cemetery pages on find-agrave can be verified, but the only way for that to happen is if they are mentioned. I Will be reporting you for disruptive editing if you continue to remove information & sources showing notability, the fact that there is multiple hort paragraphs about the Cemeteries shows that there is enough information out there to include them in this article. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 14:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I will continue to remove unreliable sources! No, we should absolutely not be listing family gravesites on Wikipedia, that is not important content, especially when from an unreliable source. What, are you going to list the names of pupils and teachers that are in the book too? Existence of a cemetery is NOT notability for a placename. Reywas92^Talk 15:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

● Keep- I Found this, that shows notablility. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 14:07, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, do not add unreliable sources!!! Do NOT use Find-A-Grave! Even if offline sources could verify it, that does not mean you should add these crappy links, nor copy-and-paste the copyrighted text there! A family plot of two or maybe three people should not be listed in Wikipedia anyway! That hardly even counts as a cemetery for your new "Buchanan Corner is the location of 2 cemeteries". And do not keep readding this crappy site or crappy hometownlocator! Reywas92^Talk 14:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I NEVER PASTED COPYRIGHTED TEXT, I CHANGED IT USING QUILL BOT, YOU HAVE BEEN REPORTED, AND YES EXISTENCE OF A CEMETERY IS NOTABILITY FOR A PLACE NAME, MANY PREVOUS AFD's HAVE RESULTED AS KEEP DUE TO THE EXISTENCE OF CEMETERIES, SCHOOLS, ETC. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 15:09, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And placesnamed.com is not listed in the list for sources to not be used so it is an acceptable source to be used on wikipedia. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Everything under Cemeteries you literally copied and pasted from findagrave, which is in fact copyrighted. No, you are wrong. Cemeteries are ubiquitous and their mere existence does not establish notability, especially when the only source is the unreliable findagrave. Find a reliable source with significant coverage and that could be more helpful.

The list Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources is "non-exhaustive" and only those that have been discussed multiple times. You need to familiarize yourself with WP:RS if you want to edit here. Moreover, what does this source add? Why did you add it? It obviously just copied data from the GNIS, which is already in the article, so if you think it contributes information or notability, you are wrong. Reywas92^Talk 15:37, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no i did not copy and paste from find a grave, i changed the text using quilbot, some phrases may be the same but over-all it is a different set of paragraphs, i am done arguing. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 15:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2 new sources for the cemeteries:

https://graveviews.com/cemetery/david-puckett-family-cemetery-84607

https://graveviews.com/cemetery/puckett-cemetery-84608 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 16:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PARAPHRASE. Holy cow you are bad at source analysis. Did you read the text there? They say the same thing as findagrave! They are not new sources, they are the same sources! https://graveviews.com/about says the site is also WP:UGC. It is not reliable, useful, or a basis for notability. Look at the coordinates, these are the same family plot, not even two separate cemeteries! Again, if "only David, Leannah, and possibly 1 child were buried there", that's not something worth mentioning here! That's weird and you need to stop doing this here or elsewhere! My great-uncle and his wife are buried on their own property, that doesn't make it a whole cemetery or worth including on Wikipedia, nor does that make their neighborhood notable. Reywas92^Talk 17:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To make a much more-to-the-point remark about the cemetery: it proves nothing more than that there are people buried there. Every time I head out to Damascus I go by the "Seals Family Cemetery", and it's just a plot on the edge of a farm field by the woods. Mt. Zion Cemetery, near my church, is across the intersection from the Methodist church of the same name, but both are just out in the country by themselves. The same thing goes for schools: there is a Pindell School Rd. near here, but thee was never a town on that road. We've also had cases whee the supposed town was a single store. It cannot be inferred that there was a settlement at a place simply because of a single building or the like commonly found in/near towns. Mangoe (talk) 19:30, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good point and I agree Cigarettes are Safe (talk) 03:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC) — Cigarettes are Safe (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Comment The two entries on findagrave.com appear to be the same site. One entry used the Indiana Genealogical Society and state listings, the other a personal visit, unsurprisingly giving slightly different co-ordinates, sadly not reconised as duplication or reconciled by findagrave.com. According to the record of a personal visit, two people are known to be buried there, a third is possible, and it's unknown if a fourth was moved there as apparently once intended; that's all. The graveviews.com entries are not independent, they are identical to the findagrave.com entries; one site is scraping the other. The text added to our article was identical to the two findagrave.com entries (one truncated) and not a paraphrase, both times it was added, and I've requested revdel of those copyright violations. NebY (talk) 16:45, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as I agree with Mangoe. I add to the delete argument the fact that the place is not listed in "From Needmore to Prosperity : Hoosier place names in folklore and history" [1]. I cannot find any mention in newspapers, and there is only one "reliable source" brought to dicussion. That book that has already been linked here by gamerboy. I point out this book is about Buchanan district, which contains, probably, Buchanan Corner. I further argue it's likely the place that is subject of this WP article did not exist at the time the book was published. This is because the book doesn't mention this place. I further suspect the district itself was later named after the school, and used retrospectively by the author of that book. I assert the place this article about wasn't named until the roads were built, possibly after 1916 when the book was published. Since that book isn't about the place written about here on wikipedia, it is not a proper source. I believe the general area may be known by the locals using this name as there are mentions of it as an "unincorporated community" but there are no reliable sources that support or refute this. I also remind everyone that plenty of schools exist in rural areas, as do cemeteries. (What would we do if the school hadn't been called Buchanan?, would it still be an argument then?) Probably the school gave it's name to the intersection. But also remember this school is always cited as being on private land in the source that gamerboy provided, which calls into question whether it is in fact a government provided school. Finally, the source that everyone keeps arguing about is about Buchanan district, not necessarily this corner.James.folsom (talk) 23:26, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I added a source Cigarettes are Safe (talk) 05:33, 11 May 2024 (UTC) — Cigarettes are Safe (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Hometown Locator is a GNIS mirror, it's not a reliable source for calling something a populated place or unincorporated community. –dlthewave ☎ 15:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. Cigarettes are Safe (talk) 03:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC) — Cigarettes are Safe (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

What do you mean? WP:GNIS has been discussed extensively and found to be unreliable for this purpose. Are you saying that Hometown Locator isn't just scraping and republishing that database? –dlthewave ☎ 15:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No evidence of a notable community there previously and even less so now – the source for a schoolhouse was from 1916 and the description of it in our article as "current" was not supported. NebY (talk) 09:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - No evidence of a past or current community. The book source covers "Buchanan District" with no indication that it's the same thig as Buchanan Corner. –dlthewave ☎ 15:36, 11 May 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.