Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Upper Salmon Falls

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 merge to Salmon Falls (Snake River). Participation is very low but among those who contributed there seems to be a general consensus - albeit more of a reluctant acceptance of a compromise than a wholehearted endorsement - to merge into a Salmon Falls article with a larger scope. Waggers TALK 09:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Upper Salmon Falls[edit]

[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)

Same rationale as Lower Salmon Falls, No assertion of notability, can't find any in my BEFORE. FrederalBacon (talk) 21:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. FrederalBacon (talk) 21:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GEOLAND, which says The number of known sources should be considered to ensure there is enough verifiable content for an encyclopedic article. If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the feature can instead be included in a more general article on local geography. The Snake River is notable but individual features of it should be described within the parent article unless particularly notable. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 20:11, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Lots of sources (e.g. [1] (p201-202), [2] (p52-54, p118), [3]). The obvious thing to do is merge this with both Salmon Falls (Snake River) and Lower Salmon Falls Dam and expand into a single article titled Salmon Falls, Idaho about both the falls and the hydroelectric facilities.----Pontificalibus 11:53, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:46, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - participation is low here. I would agree to a merge to gain consensus but the suggested merge target does not exist. Salmon Falls (Snake River) does exist though, which would be an ideal merge target - except that I cannot see anything in the article to merge. There is just nothing here that is not already there. I also note that Lower Salmon Falls was previously nominated and is supposedly waiting for merge into Lower Salmon Falls Dam. I suggest this article just be redirected to Salmon Falls (Snake River). This will leave (after the above merge is complete) just two articles - one on the falls and one on the dam. This seems like a sensible solution to me as both dam and falls will meet notability guidelines, although both articles could do with a lot of work. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:27, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One final relist. Please consider the redirect option in the comment above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:39, 14 September 2022 (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.