Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yarnsdale

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 00:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yarnsdale

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

Fails WP:GNG, as per the article it is a "small sandstone quarry", so I really don't see its significance. Rusf10 (talk) 03:57, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Other than a few trivial mentions in local guides, nothing to show this passes WP:GNG, and nothing in the article, or in the trivial mentions, shows it meets WP:GEOFEAT. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:47, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GEOLAND because it's a named natural feature. Yarnsdale is a dale – and its name means heron valley, on account of its water and birdlife. The quarry is a particular feature which is now of interest to climbers but there's plenty more to say about the place. Andrew D. (talk) 08:57, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable per WP:GEOLAND, and WP:GEOFEAT is not applicable. SportingFlyer (talk) 17:31, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Which part of WP:GEOLAND does this fall under? Populated Places? Nobody lives there. Disputed Regions? I don't think so Named natural features?- A quarry is man-made, not natural.--Rusf10 (talk) 17:46, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with you were it a quarry: per sources, it appears to be a valley (Named natural feature) which contains a quarry. Quarries don't contain streams, see: [1] SportingFlyer (talk) 07:49, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is Yarnsdale not Yarnsquarry, a dale is a natural feature and it is obviously named. Szzuk (talk) 21:37, 19 February 2018 (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.