Lincoln Township, Jasper County, Missouri: It seems to be a trivial GNIS entry.  I did not initiate PROD because the consensus on having such articles is not clear.  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 04:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Missouri .  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 04:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] A township in Missouri is a sub-county organization.  You won't find anything like a settlement for this on a map because it's essentially a governing body for unincorporated areas within the county.  As of the 21st century they generally only serve a road maintenance purpose; I'm not sure if they did anything else in the past.  Sometimes townships would have significant coverage, sometimes they won't; if there's not any coverage here I'd recommand a light merge to the county article; this is a somewhat different situation than the unincorporated community articles.  Hog Farm Talk 04:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sources : I found seven results in this book and a short paragraph here .  Left guide ( talk ) 07:23, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And you didn't read a single one of them.   None of the phrase matches in the first book are actually about Lincoln Township.   They are all biographies of people in Jasper County: Harry T. Boyd, James Barnett Stemmons, Isaac E. Coplen, Jacob N. Bradbury, Joseph Powell, and Virgil C. Erwin.   They use the township merely as an address here and there.   Research isn't phrase matching with Google and counting the hits.   Research is actually reading what search engines turn up.  The genealogical society's transcription of the atlas is not very trustworthy, as the original did not say "paste in here" in the Joplin Lead Mines as that WWW page does.   And we really cannot repeat 19th century fawning such as "fine farms" and "thrifty and industrious population" in Wikipedia.   Furthermore since that 1876 history with the fawning subtracted amounts to not much has happened yet a history from a lot later than 1876 is clearly needed.  Which there will not be.   Missouri had optional township government in 1872, abolished just after that history was published, and then again in 1879 under its new 1875 constitution.   Even by 1997 only 23 counties in Missouri had opted for any township government at all, which went down to 22 in 2001, and Jasper has not ever been one of them.   For Jasper and the rest, Lincoln is just a survey rectangle.  Uncle G ( talk ) 10:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've found this from the 1880s but most of the chapter is about residents of the township, not the township itself.  Everything else I can find is passing mentions, mainly statements that people lived in Lincoln Township.  I think we're better off merging all township articles for this county to a new section at the Jasper County, Missouri article.  Hog Farm Talk 22:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Unrelated Question .  Why is there articles for deletion if merge or redirect is possible for all articles.  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 22:52, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Because in some cases the content just shouldn't be covered anywhere, so outright deletion is better than trying to cram it somewhere that it doesn't belong.  Hog Farm Talk 23:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge into Jasper county.  This is a non legally recognized place because it has no government that represents the people who live there.  Their legally recognized government is the Jasper county government.  The article doesn't benefit from the presumed notability awarded to legally recognized places.  Therefore, to be a stand alone article it needs to meet WP:GNG.  In my opinion, It fails WP:GEOLAND because it lacks legal recognition.  It fails WP:Sustained because the nominator and the commentors have demonstrated a lack of sustained coverage of the subject.  It violates WP:NRV because "the evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest,".  Furthermore, even if you want to argue that it is legally recognized, it doesn't matter.  "Presumed notability" is merely shortcut to allow unimpeded addition of articles that are clearly notable.  The notability of these presumed notable articles can be challenged, and if shown to be failing WP:GNG, merged or deleted.  No subject is automatically irrevocably notable.  It's had seven years for someone to show material that it demonstrates notability, lets merge it now.  Mergers are easily undone if any new evidence comes to light.  Thank you to all those who worked to dig up material on this subject.  James.folsom ( talk ) 00:07, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep added US census bureau data.  Patapsco913 ( talk ) 02:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  From WP:GEOLAND itself: Census tracts, Abadi, and other areas not commonly recognized as a place (such as the area in an irrigation district) are not presumed to be notable.  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 03:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It is not a census tract or an area in an irrigation district; it is a township.  Patapsco913 ( talk ) 03:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It is trivial to say something is not "another word describing it".  As discussed above, Lincoln Township only exists for the purpose of road maintenance and census.  Or in other words, it meets clearly census tract .  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 03:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] According to Uncle G it never even did road maintenance, either, though it takes some analysis of what he said.  James.folsom ( talk ) 21:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well a census tract or an irrigation district is in no ways comparable to a township.  Patapsco913 ( talk ) 04:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] People (Uncle G) have made the point earlier in the discussion, that this "township" is in fact very comparable to a census tract.  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 04:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It doesn't matter it's already been made clear it doesn't have a government and never has had a government, and therefore is not legally recognized.  More people reasonable would simply google this and see that it is true.  James.folsom ( talk ) 21:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Obvious keep The nominator’s stated reasoning for this AfD is nonsense, doesn’t pass the most cursory scrutiny, and is at odds with the first of Wikipedia’s Five Pillars : “ Wikipedia is an encyclopedia Wikipedia combines many features of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers. ” Our thousands upon thousands of township articles are ubiquitous on en.Wikipedia and underly the very reason we have the categories Category:Townships in Jasper County, Missouri , and Category:Townships in Missouri .  Note that the latter category (townships in just Missouri) must have thousands of townships listed.  The nom’s other rationale ( I see only roads and fields ), is presumably the result of zooming in on a satellite view and is utter nonsense since Lincoln Township, like any other rural agricultural area with a population of 300, has farmers’ homes accompanying their fields.  It’s not hard to see those homes if one cares to acknowledge what’s landing on their retinas ( Google Map view, here ).  Lincoln Township is a run-of-the-mill township no more deserving of being expunged from Wikipedia than thousands of other townships in the US.  Greg L ( talk ) 03:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - in the USA, many states have townships.  In some states such as New Jersey, they have important governmental functions and may employ 100s of police, teachers, etc.  In other states such as North Carolina, they are historical vestiges with no modern purpose or structure.  — A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 14:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Clearly a populated place.  BD2412 T 17:10, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment All standalone articles need to meet WP:N.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by James.folsom ( talk • contribs ) 21:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The reasoning stated by the nominator, that he "sees only roads and fields" might be true (that's what he sees) but what he sees isn't the true facts.  Also the nominator failed to show why this township deserves to be treated any different than all the other articles we have on townships in Missouri.  MLee1957 ( talk ) 22:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Those other townships, if not notable, should be merged into the county article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by James.folsom ( talk • contribs ) 23:33, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment supporting “keep” Merging into county-wide articles, James, is impractical beyond all comprehension and flies in the face of what makes Wikipedia useful and easy to locate the information one needs.  Missouri’s townships are civil and have legal standings defined by Missouri law.  Moreover, Missouri has 1,378 townships apportioned amongst 114 counties .  Henpecking this article to death in hopes of sliding a Post-It note-sized policy change under the door would run afoul with WP:Consensus/Levels of Consensus , which states Consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, cannot override community consensus on a wider scale.  A policy change to consolidate townships under their respective counties would require going to Village Pump and proposing such a sweeping idea.  By I seriously doubt such a proposal will fly since no one would want to wade through stupendously large county articles; that’s the whole reason we have internal hyperlinks.  Without proper use of hyperlinks to break things up into bite-size portions, which benefits readers and rewards and motivates volunteer wikipedians who generally want to make a small dent in the multiverse, we would end up with “article elephantiasis” like “ List of Fables characters ”.  With the attention spans of readers now approaching one Planck length, readers are increasingly disinterested in such articles.  Greg L ( talk ) 00:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as a county subdivision; see minor civil division .  These are not census tracts (as opposed to census county divisions , which are not notable as there is no legal recognition).  Elli ( talk | contribs ) 23:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In minor civil division , it is written: ^Missouri - townships (mostly non-governing), बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 23:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, but that doesn't mean they aren't a legally-recognized place.  Elli ( talk | contribs ) 23:51, 30 December 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: no consensus