Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beck Bottom

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 merge‎ to Lowick, Cumbria. as mentioned in the discussion as an ATD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:55, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beck Bottom

[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)

No indication of notability. Unsourced since creation in 2007. I've corrected the coordinates (which previously led to an unlabelled marshy area), so it now points to a small cluster of buildings identified as "Beck Bottom" on Ordnance Survey 1:50k mapping, but there is nothing to indicate that this is more than a single farm. The article called it a "village" until a few minutes ago when I amended it to "hamlet", having found it as one of the Cumbria articles in the WP:FEB24 unreferenced articles backlog drive.

Beck Bottom appears in our List of United Kingdom locations: Bea-Bem and GENUKI lists it as a gazetteer entry, but neither the Ordnance Survey's "Get Outside" nor Vision of Britain mention it. PamD 12:49, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. PamD 12:49, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - this is hard to find but it looks like it is a signposted place, see the instructions to access this wildlife reserve This road follows the eastern boundary of the reserve. After the turn off for Beck Bottom, park on the verge on the right hand side of the road. I think it might be tough to say much about it that could be referenced so I'm currently thinking it would likely be better merged to Lowick, Cumbria unless someone can source a good reference to show otherwise. JMWt (talk) 13:22, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- There might well be a signpost to an individual farm, so I don't think this helps. @JMWt PamD 23:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:49, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is an OS settlement[1] but might be better merged with Lowick. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:38, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure that inclusion in that list qualifies as a "legally recognised place", and we don't see signs of "non-trivial coverage by their name in multiple, independent reliable sources", to quote the first two bullets of WP:NPLACE. PamD 23:37, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low. Recognition by OS is legal recognition in England. And if it is a farm, then it is a populated place.
    But then nobody is disagreeing with you that there is little to say on a standalone page. JMWt (talk) 07:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - So your interpretation is that every named farm on an OS map is "typically presumed to be notable"? I suppose it depends on how "place" is interpreted.
      In this case I think we will struggle to find a reliable source even for its inclusion in the Lowick, Cumbria article. The 2022 parish plan report mentions it twice as a location of flood concern, using two different spellings: Beck Bottom and Beckbottom. The 2005 plan mentions "Beck bottom" as the location of a bridleway problem. Neither shows whether it is anything more than one farm. PamD 08:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      - The coordinates (though their a bit off) verify its location and the OS source I provided verifies it being a settlement so I don't think additional textual sources are needed to mention in the Lowick article. We would need textual sources for things like someone living there or its name origin etc but I think this is not really needed unless we're questioning its status as a settlement (which we do appear to though as noted the OS source does say so) or its location which I don't think anyone is questioning at least the location the OS shows which as noted is slightly off our coords. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:08, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in some form - it's clearly a place, both in OS, and with a very small number people noted as living there in 1851, with some mentions in books on the Lake District over the years. SportingFlyer T·C 15:23, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 1851 Mannex & Company directory of the area has this as two farms in the township of Lowick, run respectively by Williams Robinson and Rowlandson; and by the looks of things farms are exactly what it still is today. Although one is now named Riddings Farm. Uncle G (talk) 15:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sign off the road. It seems to consist of a farm and three houses. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The farm's address is Lowick Green. There's a holiday cottage. If it was recognised as a hamlet, even with nothing to write about, I'd have gone for a redirect to the parish Lowick, Cumbria. There's no evidence it is or was a hamlet, so unless something else to contradict this turns up, I'm leaning delete. Rupples (talk) 23:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette ^{(Let's discuss together!)} 07:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It was just a couple farms, not an actual, notable community. Can be mentioned in Lowick if necessary. Reywas92^Talk 00:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability of tiny places in Great Britain is a relatively easy thing. There are things like the Victoria County Histories, 19th and 20th century local histories, histories of land charters and whatnot, and all sorts of other stuff. One never has to resort to dot-on-map-means-X arguments, such as the one about Ordnance Survey maps here in this discussion. Either a place turns out to have documentation going back to the 1960s/the Industrial Revolution/the Norman Conquest/the Roman Empire, or (like this article at hand) there just is not any documentation at all. This shows up the problem with turning the GEOLAND "presumed notable" guideline into a criterion of actual notability, and why "populated place" and "legally recognized" are bad criteria for actual notability. For actual notability, given our project:Wikipedia is not a directory policy, we need a lot more than the trade directory that I pointed to earlier, which merely settled the What-even-is-this-dot-on-the-map? question. Uncle G (talk) 08:41, 5 March 2024 (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.