Deletion of Zoneton Fire Protection District

Comment: Arguing that this meets  is a complete misunderstanding of that guideline. The guideline is intended to recognize places of human habitation, not ''every conceivable administrative division that contains human residents''. This is the equivalent of arguing that every city block, or every street, or every ''house'', is notable; it's an absurd argument. The places of human habitation covered by this tax district have their own articles, as appropriate. Additionally, I find no evidence that this meets GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GEOLAND)

Comment: Even if  did apply (which I have a hard time seeing why it should), it specifically says that notability is "presumed, but not guaranteed" for features that meet . And to quote from : "significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article". Since there is no sign of significant coverage in this case that assumptions does not hold, and therefore there is no reason to assume notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NGEO||WP:GNG)

Comment: I believe that all independent governmental units are likely to meet . Unlike census tracts, where they are just passive governmental units, each government district exerts a certain amount of authority (and likely has press coverage of the entity
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Fails  so we can only rely on  and the only relevant criteron is "populated legally recognised places". The question therefore is whether this Fire Protection District is legally recognised as a "place". Place (United States Census Bureau) seems quite clear that a "place" in the US is defined based on an independent concentraion of population, and that an adminstrative area for a particular pupose that encompases various places is not in itself a place. Without sources supporting the notion that a US Fire Protection District is legally recognised as a "place" the article must be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:GEOLAND)

Comment: Per .  I see nom's point about assessment districts but nevertheless I think they're notable.  Perhaps nom might try to gain consensus for modifying GEOLAND to exclude such inhabited legally defined regions? Special:Contributions/192.160.216.52|192.160.216.52
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GEOLAND)