Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leighland

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 merge to John Helder Wedge. Sandstein 10:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leighland

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

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

I came accross this article whilst adding co-ordinate data to Tasmanian locations. The property fails to pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines as there is no significant coverage of the property in reliable sources (or any other sources (bar retail advertisments) that I could find). Straight Red (talk) 06:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:37, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:39, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect~~Delete~~ Changing to merge and redirect as per below. It seems it is not the only one of the oldest properties. I found the following:
- "Man Finds Wife's Body In River". The Mercury. Vol. CLXX, no. 24, 627. Tasmania, Australia. 16 November 1949. p. 8. Retrieved 17 March 2019 – via National Library of Australia.
- "Country Intelligence". The Tasmanian. Vol. XXI, no. 2. Tasmania, Australia. 9 January 1892. p. 32. Retrieved 17 March 2019 – via National Library of Australia.
- "OBITUARY". Daily Telegraph. Vol. XLI, no. 30. Tasmania, Australia. 4 February 1921. p. 6. Retrieved 17 March 2019 – via National Library of Australia.
- "Advertising". Launceston Examiner. Vol. XL, no. 290. Tasmania, Australia. 29 November 1880. p. 4. Retrieved 17 March 2019 – via National Library of Australia.
- "FOR THE MAN ON THE LAND NG H1 RYE GRASS IN PASTURES AT EVANDALE". The Examiner (Tasmania). Vol. CXI, no. 153. Tasmania, Australia. 6 September 1952. p. 11. Retrieved 17 March 2019 – via National Library of Australia.
- http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/pictoria/gid/slv-pic-aab33988

but these are all I could find and I think not strong enough to save the article, even though they do directly support some of the current article content. Aoziwe (talk) 12:28, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice research! NB Some of these seem to be near Perth, so are a different place of the same name. That would include the picture that's last on your list, unfortunately -- otherwise it would have been a nice image to include. Alarichall (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, ignore that! It was me who was getting confused about which Perth the sources were talking about! Alarichall (talk) 21:50, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

YES there is MORE than one Perth in AU. Aoziwe (talk) 01:54, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Surely this article straightforwardly meets WP:GEOLAND: 'Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. Even abandoned places can be notable, because notability encompasses their entire history'? There's a bit of information in Rebe Taylor, '- The wedge collection and the conundrum of humane colonisation.pdf The Wedge Collection and the Conundrum of Humane Colonisation', Meanjin (Summer 2017), 34-55 that will allow me to provide a few references too. Alarichall (talk) 21:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alarichall I am not at all sure that GEOLAND is applicable. The subject is not a locality, it is an individual, not extensive property. If you have more references than the ones I found and you can enhance the article, I am open to changing my !vote. (I got a 404 error on your link above.) Aoziwe (talk) 01:54, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply, Aoziwe! I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. Going back to the WP:GEOLAND criteria: is Leighlands a legally recognised place? Yes. It is clearly a place, and it was legally constituted as a 1500-acre estate. Was it populated? Yes. So it meets the criterion. GEOLAND works rather differently from the general notability criteria, which are what you seem to be thinking of in suggesting that more references are required (though I have added some more references). Alarichall (talk) 16:26, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But by that logic would every quarter acre block in every suburb with a lived in house be notable? Aoziwe (talk) 07:52, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, good point. Well, while recognising that this article is never going to be a major contribution to world geography, I'd suggest that we might interpret GEOLAND differently in rural contexts and urban ones. In urban space, small properties together constitute a 'place', whereas in rural space, estates constitute a 'place'. But I wouldn't want to get into a big argument about this! At the end of the day, I just imagine that there will be people out there who want to look up this historically interesting spot; I don't see it as doing anyone any harm; and it does get a passing mention in a few scholarly sources. (By the way -- you may know how to interpret this: this article, p. 72, gives what seem to be co-ordinates for Leighlands, as EP 17006451. But I'm not sure how to interpret this. Just thought I'd ask in case it enables CaptainRaju to sort out his geoco-ordinates issue in the event of keeping the article.) Alarichall (talk) 12:34, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No biggy for me either. I just think you need something other than GEOLAND to rely solidly on. Cheers. Aoziwe (talk) 12:45, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:25, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Interesting discussion but I think we should keep this article. - Ret.Prof (talk) 15:07, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:57, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Privately owned estate does not have notability. Reywas92^Talk 18:24, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to John Helder Wedge. It's an old estate, sure, but besides that, there does not seem to be anything notable, or even interesting, to say about it. SpinningSpark 12:54, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is the relationship between the two? Aoziwe (talk) 11:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He is the person the estate was originally granted to. SpinningSpark 11:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yep I did know that but did not recall it. I should have rechecked the article! Changing my !vote to merge and redirect. Aoziwe (talk) 13:22, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Eeesh, if we take GEOLAND to its absurd limit, the small house I own is a "legally recognized place" -- it's in the county Registry of Deeds. I find no notability for this place. Nha Trang ^Allons! 00:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to John Helder Wedge, the original owner and developer of Leighland.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:58, 3 April 2019 (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.