Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boulder Creek (Queensland)
it is not that it doesn't have coverage, see ''e.g'' http://www.dailymercury.com.au/news/team-comes-to-rescue/2099380/ Swift response from firies after couple stranded on car, but it doesn't have the coverage required by Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Parks are considered on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the |general notability guidelines, unlike legally recognized populated places which have their own guideline. There is also a problem with the name since there is another Boulder Creek in Queensland further south near Gympie, see https://web.archive.org/web/20150728113452/http://www.gympietimes.com.au/news/gympie-hosts-outdoor-recreation-forum/2614152/ Gympie to host outdoor recreation forum.  Normally, I would say "redirect" to Calen, Queensland, but Calen is far away and because of the one near Gymie that redirect would be confusing.  There is nothing wrong with a properly iting sources|cited entry for Boulder Creek within another appropriate article.  While citation to a secondary source is always better, a primary source may be used for verification.  If there were |notability then a better name would be hydrographic disambiguation by main stream. As this Boulder Creek seems to flow into Omega Creek, that title would be Boulder Creek (Omega Creek) for the creek.  For the park one would use the jurisdiction that has control over the park, whatever municipality, forest reserve, or agency that may be, for disambiguation. (Would that be Mount Ossa National Park? If so maybe mention belongs in that article.) {{GEOnet2|32FA882D8DBA3774E0440003BA962ED3|Boulder Creek (Approved - N
— User:Bejnar, 18:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:C||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)