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. Pretty clear consensus that this is WP:SYNTH; no need to relist. Sandstein 14:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Native Americans and hot springs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This is an overgeneralized article that is basically about four hot springs. These “Native Americans are spiritual people” articles are generally not helpful and at times border on cultural appropriation. Where a specific tribe used a specific spring for spiritual purposes, and that use is public, that can be noted at the appropriate article. A gathering of romanticized Woo is original research and not useful. My suggestion is that the content on individual springs be moved to the individual article, and the sources used to support the overbroad conclusions that are WP:SYNTH can also be moved to individual articles. Montanabw^(talk) 23:06, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This article takes references of dispirit events and tries to SYNTHESIZE them into proof of some common, over-generalized philosophy that can not be supported by reliable sourcing. If a suitable article or articles can be found for any reliably sourced content, merge there. GenQuest ^"scribble" 03:39, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:03, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Montana-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The nomination's talk of appropriation is ironic because it proposes to re-use this content elsewhere and then delete the edit history, so denying the authors their proper attribution. It says that there are just four springs but the page does not yet include the Yellowstone area. This paper, for example, explains that when that land was appropriated by the US government, it was the subject of myth-making to cover-up the native history and so make the place seems newly discovered and safe. We should preserve a full history of this matter per our policy WP:PRESERVE. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment by nominator: The issues surrounding a place like Yellowstone (which has dozens if not hundreds of hot springs and geysers, by the way) is a good example of precisely why Native presence needs to be discussed in individual articles, not some generic and inaccurate overview filled with New Age romanticism. This article, done “properly”, would really be nothing more than “List of hot springs with documentable Native American cultural significance” and would contain dozens of locations. I don’t see a need to destroy attribution. We can take the content for specific hot springs in this article and move it to the article for the individual teacher, and an edit some reason such as, “moving content from [attributed authors name] deleted page” and that should handle the attribution matter. Montanabw^(talk) 15:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: If merging parts of the article is the result of this discussion, the attribution is preserved throught the MERGE process if done correctly. This would not be an issue. GenQuest ^"scribble" 01:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - WP:SYNTH, agree with merging parts of this article to individual articles. Comment - I am leaning towards WP:TNT/delete, but will wait a bit before !voting. The article is centered on 4 examples in the U.S. and does not mention indigenous peoples, nor hot springs in Canada, Mexico or Central America. It is written in the past tense, as though Native peoples are not living cultures. It is simultaneously too general and too specific. It over-generalizes NA’s, and does not convey the diversity and differences between peoples. It is too specific as only 4 springs are given as examples, yet there are over 1,600 in existence in the US alone? A lot of the New Age-y wording has now been removed, thankfully. Andrew Davidson provided an excellent source that critiques the fallacy that Native peoples “feared the geyser regions as inhabited by evil spirits”. I’ve added that source to the Further reading section. Netherzone (talk) 00:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC) !voting above. Netherzone (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • How are editors supposed to merge the content, or see what's in the further reading, after the article is deleted? Uncle G (talk) 19:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Uncle G, I've added some of the content, citations and further reading to relevant articles: (Yellowstone National Park, Tonopah, Arizona, Hot Springs, Arkansas, Saratoga Springs, New York and List of hot springs in the United States). Netherzone (talk) 13:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per nom, lots of WP:SYNTH, no proof of general notability CommanderWaterford (talk) 09:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Clear synth, no sources are cited that specifically talk about Native Americans and hotsprings. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. This is WP:SYNTH and also way too broad : like saying "Eurasians have a long history with hot springs" or an article titled "Asians and boating" - there are ignore important differences between different parts of the continent. @Authors of the article: you're very welcome to write individual articles like "Hot springs in Nez Perce culture", if there is enough WP:RS material to warrant an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trimton (talk • contribs)
• Delete There may be a notable topic here, but we need to TNT this mess at least.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Riteboke (talk) 07:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I don't think WP:SYNTH applies, because the article is essentially a recreation of the Lund article, which is from a peer reviewed publication, and not an original synthesis of multiple sources. I agree there are issues with presenting this topic as is. I have placed a note on some relevant wikiproject pages related to First Peoples. I request that we re-list this for another round, to allow for time for editors who work in this area to comment or perhaps rescue or suggest a merge target for this article.4meter4 (talk) 13:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge the content with the following articles: the section on Tonopah hot springs can go to the Hot springs section of Tonopah, Arizona; the section on Sleeping Child hot springs can go to Nez Perce and maybe Missoula, Montana; the sentences on Saratoga Springs that have not already been included in the Saratoga Springs, New York article can be put in the Springs section there; and the section on Hot Springs, Arkansas can go to the Natural spring section of Hot Springs, Arkansas. I'd suggest any other text people think worth keeping can be merged into the Hot spring article, though I'm not sure there's much there. James Hyett (talk) 13:57, 14 April 2021 (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.