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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Riverdale, Mendocino County, California[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)

Disputed PROD. I do not think this location passes WP:GEOLAND as there is little evidence it was ever really a populated recognized place; the sources cited are either not reliable (GNIS), or trivial passing mentions that establish existence but not notability. From what I can gather, this seems to have been the site of a resort: [1] mentions "Riverdale Resort...in the city of Leggett", and this site: [2] can sell you a vintage postcard from said resort, specifically labeled as being in Leggett, California. A satellite view of the coordinates shows a couple of houses along the river, but not much else. The vast majority of references to Riverdale (even in the Mendocino County press) are to the Riverdale in Fresno County, so I think a redirect to Leggett, California would be potentially confusing and not useful to the average user; I think this article should just be deleted in the absence of more evidence that this was a populated place. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 16:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and California. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 16:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not appear to have either legal recognition or significant coverage to meet our notability standards. Looks to be a former resort area, Streetview shows a few occupied homes, but nothing noteworthy. –dlthewave ☎ 17:44, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:Geoland#Settlements and administrative regions states that only legally recognized places are presumed notable. Non-legally recognized places such as Riverdale, must meet WP:GNG in order to be considered notable. In particular Riverdale fails Wikipedia:Notability#SUSTAINED, I also believe that previous discussion indicates that Riverdale fails WP:NRV as well. policy guidance given in both WP:GNG and WP:GEOLAND are that such articles should be merged into the article that covers the notable administrative area that contains it, but this appears to not be or never was a populated place so nothing to merge.

James.folsom (talk) 01:56, 26 December 2023 (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.