Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gingerah, Western Australia

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)‎ Broc (talk) 14:33, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gingerah, Western Australia

[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)

Place exists in census data but shows no population. Satellite images show no roads and no signs of human activity in the area. Does not fulfill WP:NGEO. Broc (talk) 07:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Australia. Broc (talk) 07:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Previous census data and gazetteers should be checked. The population was probably greater than zero once. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The population was 5 in the 2016 Australian census. Also, it doesn't have to be populated/residential to be notable—for example, the area seems to be a proposed renewable energy hub[1].--Canley (talk) 00:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Don't know where you looked but I see roads and evidence of human activity. duffbeerforme (talk) 01:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see, coordinates on the page are way off. duffbeerforme (talk) 01:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

comment It's not a town, at least not according to the census, and the energy project seems to affirm this. Mangoe (talk) 03:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think it meets the notability criteria per WP:POPULATED, which states Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. In this case, it is an officially recognised locality as shown on official map services like https://nationalmap.gov.au/ and https://maps.slip.wa.gov.au/landgate/locate/. Calistemon (talk) 15:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per long-standing precedent of keeping articles like this. As an editor who often works on Western Australian places, if I'd noticed this article in the state it was in when it was nominated for deletion, I would have redirected it to the relevant local government area (in this case the Shire of Broome), but the article has enough content now that this doesn't seem to be a good idea anymore. Graham87 (talk) 13:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the editing of the article, and the comments by Calistemon and Graham87 JarrahTree 13:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm withdrawing the nomination, thanks to the editors that added additional material to the page. Broc (talk) 14:33, 23 April 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.