Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aragonite, Utah

Don't delete this article. Aragonite is still a good place for rockhounds to hunt.

Aragonite, Utah

[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)

It having been suggested very pointedly that I should look into this one, I've made a return trip. This is impeded by my usual topo/aerial source not going back beyond the 1970s, but what they do show in that timeframe is a string of buildings along the rails that looks nothing like a town, as they have a decidedly industrial look. Then there is a Quonset hut that sits away from the tracks, but around about 2000 they moved the siding so it now swings by this building, the others having been demolished. Searching shows lots of general references to aragonite and to the incinerator, along with a few rail-related hits and the one ghost town hit. The last talks about some building remnants, but there's nothing there that evidences ruins of residences. Mangoe (talk) 04:42, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Utah. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(Author) Keep The site meets WP:GNG as it is, but in this case, it also meets WP:GEOLAND; a 1950s-era survey of mining in Utah notes a small townsite once existed there. Chubbles (talk) 10:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This former settlement (now a ghost town) and current hazardous and radiological waste site meets WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG. Netherzone (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- That statement is a falsehood, one taken from the article (without any research, not even checking the sources cited) but a falsehood nonetheless. This article is a falsehood. Aragonite, Utah is not a "community" nor a "ghost town". It is an aragonite mill and mine that was at one point run by the Utah Calcium Products Company.(Morris 1964, p. 192). It is in the Tooele County West Desert Hazardous Industries Area, an area selected by the County in part because it was and is unpopulated. The nearest population of any sort is 45 miles away, by design. (GSHI 2015, p. 3) This is another of the "ghost town"/"unincorporated community" falsehoods that Wikipedia has been publishing to the world, and if it weren't for the GNIS mess this would be systematic hoaxery, ghost towns and communities that do not exist and never have done. Uncle G (talk) 09:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Morris, H.T. (1964). "Mineral and Water Resources of Utah: Limestone and dolomite". Bulletin. 73. United States Geological Survey.
  - Glenn Springs Holding (2015). "Updated Schedule, Transporation and Disposal Plan" (PDF).
    - Comment - Perhaps it is not a falsehood. According to page 368 the book, Utah An Explorer's Guide:[1] Aragonite Ghost Town is an old mining town from the early 20th century that mined aragonite. This mine was only in operation for a few years but today the mineshafts are still open and a few bunkhouses remain, as well as an old truck. Aragonite is also near the Hastings Cutoff, part of the famous Donner Party route of the 1840s. This book was published in 2009 before the Wikipedia article was written, so it is doubtful that the WP article incited a hoax or influenced the author of the book into believing a falsehood. Netherzone (talk) 21:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC) Courtesy ping Uncle G Netherzone (talk) 21:08, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - Comment 2 - According to the Provo Daily Herald, Aragonite, Utah's Aptus facility was Utah's first hazardous waste incinerator.[2] Netherzone (talk) 01:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Is not and never was a community. An entry on ghosttowns.com does not actually mean it's a ghost town, but an abandoned site. Reywas92^Talk 13:49, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Aragonite Hazardous Waste Incinerator per the new source. ~~Delete~~ - Not a community mostly per Uncle G's research that shows it was very likely never populated. Turning to the sources:

The source cited above by Chubbles literally tries to say that the mineral Aragonite is named after the "town" Aragonite ("This mineral, similar to calcite, but of greater density, is found near the small town named after it - Aragonite"). This is obviously not true - Aragonite is named after Molina de Aragón in Spain, where it was first identified in 1797. This source is therefore obviously not to be relied on.
GNIS is not a reliable source.
Utah Atlas & Gazetteer - I cannot access this source, but from what can be seen online it appears to be a map/atlas, and as such does not support notability.
Utah Ghost Towns - Self-published source, not reliable, does not state that the site was ever really populated but instead just a mine.
ARAGONITE HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATOR, UTAH - This is significant coverage... of the waste incinerator. It is also not independent of the source.
Aragonite Permit: Clean Harbors, LLC - This is about the waste incinerator, and is not independent of the source.
Utah incinerator faces penalties, Deseret News - This is the only independent, significant coverage here, but is ultimately about the waste incinerator company.
Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc. to pay penalty for chemical reporting violations at Aragonite, Utah facility. US EPA - Government press-release, not independent coverage, and is about the waste incinerator.

This just confirms what Uncle G said - this place was likely never populated, just a mine and later waste-incinerator. There is some coverage of the waste-incinerator, but as a bare minimum another piece preferably from a different year in a different reliable and independent publication about it is needed to get it over GNG. FOARP (talk) 14:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You read the Utah's Mining Industry source backward, it says it's the place named after the mineral, but there's still no indication that an abandoned bunkhouse is really a "ghost town" or makes a notable former community. Reywas92^Talk 15:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would this meet your WP:HEY for the incinerator? Ultimately, I'm not terribly bothered as to whether this article is located at its current site or is relocated to Aragonite Hazardous Waste Incinerator, though I hope that name change would not engender a stripping of the content about the geography and prior uses of the site. I am rather unpersuaded that "there is no there, there", in relation to a historical townsite (people who worked in the mines decades ago probably did not all live 45 miles away, for one thing), but if anything about the current article is genuinely inaccurate, I certainly want to correct that. Chubbles (talk) 16:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chubbles - I think the Salt Lake Tribune article gets this to a bare GNG pass for the incinerator. With the Deseret News piece this gets it over the line. WP:CORP is just passed as well, since both the Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News are not purely local sources (instead they're regional, maybe even state-wide), and the subject matter is not WP:MILL. PS - the miners probably lived in a simple camp, not a permanent community. Typically they would only spend a matter of months there each year going by similarly remote mines in e.g., Canada. FOARP (talk) 20:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:31, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting a few more useful things: [3], [4], [5]. Chubbles (talk) 15:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:20, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also just noting that I am willing to do the work to add these new sources to the article in the event of a favorable outcome. Chubbles (talk) 17:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]