 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Uuuhhh, guys . . .
editThis body of water is a tiny creek less than a km long (about a half mile), can easily be jumped over, has 3/4 of a line in it's entry, with no references. Maybe we should put the article out of it's misery???? Dr.gregory.retzlaff (talk) 07:15, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Addendum. It appears the pertinent issue is "notability verification", specifically, are there reliable sources supporting the article? This article does not have any sources, reliable or no, and thus does not seem to pass the notability test, thus should be a candidate for deletion. I'm new, and not going to start the ball rolling on this, maybe the page creator can do something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.gregory.retzlaff (talk • contribs) 07:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Attribution
editText copied from Aschaff to Glattbach (river). See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:19, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- References copied from German Wikipedia. See that article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not arguing the references and source. My point is that the river is tiny, and the notability for Wikipedia is very questionable. I once created a river nearly as large by accidentally leaving my garden hose running for a half hour. It's less than a km long and can be jumped over easily. I postulate it should be a candidate for deletion.