Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Addis Run

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. Overall consensus is for the article to be retained. However, some merge suggestions are also present herein, which can be further discussed on an article talk page if desired. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Addis Run

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

This page has no encyclopedic information to offer and is one among the 'Orphaned pages'.
TopCipher 09:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 February 20. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep or merge to Hughes River (West Virginia). Of course, we don't delete articles for being orphaned -- an easily fixable problem in this case -- and the fact that we do have a reliable source on the stream's name origins means we have "information beyond statistics and coordinates" per WP:GEOLAND. But only barely more so a merge might be best. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:57, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Hughes River (West Virginia). Not enough content to merit a separate article. It'd be better off on a list of a tributaries in the Hughes River article. Bitmapped (talk) 18:36, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:GEOLAND. Valid stub about a natural, named geographical feature and there is an additional source for etymology.– Gilliam (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Streams, rivers are considered to be notable. Wikipedia is a gazetter-thank you-RFD (talk) 15:13, 23 February 2017 (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.