Talk:Trimble Township Community Forest

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 March 2011. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Low-importance).

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trimble Township Community Forest edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

The current name of the article is Trimble Community Forest. I thought that there was consensus at AfD to rename this article. I note that the map at the top of the article is unsourced and is therefore not reliable as a source for the name of the forest being "Trimble Community Forest". Unscintillating (talk) 03:20, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Though I still think the subject fails WP:N, I agree with Unscintillating. The article should be moved. I also think the map is unsourced OR and should be removed. Novaseminary (talk) 03:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think the move is not controversial. Unscintillating (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

the unsourced map edit

Here is a related case. I've seen that images don't quite have the same policies, but I agree this map should be removed. Unscintillating (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

fails WP:N? edit

I think you misunderstand Wikipedia norms and practices as shown by ten thousand geography articles. You could have tried to make the case that this area is a geopolitical area only recognized by Ohio, and that that might make for an exception, but that is not the approach you took at AfD. Did you look at Barber Island? Unscintillating (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

I did take a look. Without sources it is tough to know, but I assume that island is notable. This, however, is nothing more than a geopolitical area (so far as one can ascertain from the scarce sources). I find it difficult to believe there is inherent notability for every nature preserve created by whomever, anywhere, whether it receives sufficient coverage or not. This is not the same as an island. There needs to be some verifiable level at which a preserve or park meets N. Yellowstone NP, yes. My clearly demarcated, protected vegetable and flower garden (even with two park benches and a "nature trail"), no, until it is featured a few times in magazines, at least! Not every local park is notable. The only way to know which a given park or preserve is closer to is via sources. Novaseminary (talk) 13:38, 23 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Add topic