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.
This is labelled, in a physical feature font, as "Leggett Valley". at least until the highway came through and obliterated most of what was there, at which point the topos start using the titular label in a placename font. What's there is a few random, seemingly unrelated houses and buildings, which hasn't changed appreciably over the years since the interchange was constructed. It doesn't appear that anyone thinks or thought of this as a distinct town from Leggett proper. Mangoe (talk) 22:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteRedirect. No post office. Newspapers.com had one trivial article (about how US 101 was built there) along with some trivial mentions in passing. GBooks had some trivial hits. JStor has hits for a pueblo in New Mexico. As this locale has no legal recognition and the coverage is sparse and trivial, neither #1 nor #2 of WP:GEOLAND are met. Cxbrx (talk) 03:57, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Someone did.
Several hundred people live around the base of Red Mountain in the communities of Cummings, South Leggett, Leggett, and the intervening areas.
— Red Mountains Wilderness Study Area (WSA), Arcata Resource Area, Preliminary Wilderness Recommendation: Environmental Impact Statement. United States Bureau of Land Management. 1988.
The Leggett area includes the communities of Leggett and South Leggett and is located in the northwest part of the county along the South Fork of the Eel River (fig.1). This area is occupied by a few hundred residents living in Leggett and South Leggett and in the hills surrounding these communities.
— Water-resources Investigations Report: 1983–1994. United States Geological Survey. 1986.
This is otherwise an almost entirely undocumented community, from what I can find. Uncle G (talk)
Merge/Redirect to Leggett, California. Merge anything, if anything of worth, and redirect per alternatives to deletion. South Leggett doesn't technically exist. I have been to Leggett many times and trust me, there is no South Leggett that would be anything that would merit GEO or GNG. I even have an acquaintance that lives on the "south side" of Leggett and they don't even say "I live in South Leggett." Missvain (talk) 01:30, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Delete, merge or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:45, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I changed my position above to Redirect. Merge or Delete would also be fine with me. Uncle G mentioned two references from the BLM and USGS that mention South Leggett. My WP:OR conjecture from reading other BLM and USGS documents is that the authors looked at the GNIS database and decided to include South Leggett. Cxbrx (talk) 18:27, 20 May 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.