Deletion of Kosman Island

Comment: but possibly rename to Long-Kosman reefs. The place is listed as 'Kosman Island' in multiple editions of 'Official Year Book of the Commonwealth of Australia' (for example https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ymNgwYwoFRIC&pg=PA632&lpg=PA632&dq=kosman+island&source=bl&ots=d6fJMvRhre&sig=ACfU3U07DtMUBTGxfvM7oiRPkv_rSysaaw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjb4Ivgy-HiAhWvTxUIHZ6sCMAQ6AEwBHoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=kosman%20island&f=false here) and it also appears as such on Google maps.  However this article and the research paper by Foale and Sabetian refer to the place as reefs.  I can't find any refs apart from these, so wasn't initially sure if it met our notability requirements.  However there's too much specific info to make a merge with Louisiade Archipelago appropriate. I don't agree with the comment by UncleG above: several sentences in one section of the article are close paraphrases of text from the Foale and Sabetian article, but I don't see that as problematic.  In thinking about whether this place is independently notable or not I've taken as a benchmark the many thousands of stub article we have in the encyclopedia about geographical features in Antartica.  These places have never been inhabited and never will be, and are simply described as next to another islet or peak.  The community has long agreed that these articles should be kept for their gazeteer value. As the Kosman Island/reefs have been the locus of a specific piece of research and of recorded human conflict, they meet a much higher threshold of notability than the Antartica ones.  says geographical features may be notable 'provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist.'  The content of this article is that information
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GEOLAND)