Talk:Good Intent, Pennsylvania

Potential Sources to improve artice

[1], [2] (perhaps not reliable), [3] (does not establish notability, but could be used in article to flesh out information), [4] (if anyone can find the book in their library), [5] (shows name usage going back to 1855), [6] (establishes more recent use), [7] (early oil production in area), [8] (nothing here as many pages are omitted, but if someone can access this book there may be an entry on Good Intent) 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 21:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

• I appreciate the effort, but these are mere mentions for the most part. When did "significant coverage" become mentioning the name in a single sentence? And a book on ghost towns? It's not a ghost town. That suggestion is exactly what happenes when we just search for books using a phrase and never really read them. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, many of these are mere mentions, and do not go towards establishing notability. However, they can be used to improve the article once notability is established. As to whether or not that book on ghost towns mentions Good Intentions, Pennsylvania or not, I do not know. I do know I have read other such books, and they often mention towns such as this one. Unfortunately, Google does not provide the pages where this town would appear, so one would have to actually find the book. It is merely a suggestion if someone wants to take the time to try to rescue the article. And for what it is worth, I did read each of these suggestions, insofar as was available to me. I weeded out dozens that were confirmed to have no relation to the subject. All the best, 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 04:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

• Saying you read them as much as available doesn't equal reading them. Especially when the source you posted doesn't even show the "Good Intent" usage. the search simply shows those words were used in the book, not as even as a town name. Niteshift36 (talk) 12:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)