Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dog Falls, Glen Roy

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:02, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dog Falls, Glen Roy

[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 prod'd the article with "There is no indication this is a notable geographic feature. I did a quick search and was not able to find any reliable sources that provide significant coverage of it." The prod was removed and the edit summary was "Deprod. Appears to be part of a notable geological formation, the Dog Falls Psammite" I have gone back and done more extensive searching and still have not found significant coverage of this waterfall in reliable sources. The deprod suggests that the waterfall may be notable based on it being part of a geologic formation that may be notable. Notability is not inherited. If the geologic formation is notable and someone writes an article about it and this waterfall is included in that article, then a redirect to that future article would be appropriate. As it stands I do not see anything to suggest that this waterfall is notable. ~ GB fan 14:45, 18 April 2020 (UTC) ~ GB fan 14:45, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. ~ GB fan 14:45, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. ~ GB fan 14:45, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can only find passing mentions of Dog Falls in hiking guides/reviews, no significant coverage. – ².O.^Boxing 14:55, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/redirect to List of waterfalls of Scotland. Hundreds of inappropriately mass-produced "articles" there. Reywas92^Talk 18:30, 18 April 2020 (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.