Lone Star Lake (disambiguation): It's currently a WP:ONEOTHER page, so disambiguation can be better handled with a hatnote.  - Eureka Lott 15:09, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disambiguations , Kansas ,  and Wisconsin .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:15, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ EurekaLott : I'm wondering what the hatnote will say: For the similarly named lake in Wisconsin, see List of lakes of Wisconsin#Burnett County ?  There is nothing really at the list page except for an unsourced unlinked one-entry mention.  We might as well omit the hatnote.  Jay 💬 15:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That's a good point.  The Wisconsin list doesn't have any meaningful information about that Lone Star Lake.  It might be better to eliminate the hatnote entirely.  - Eureka Lott 17:55, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've added three more to the list and sourced them, as well as sourced the original two.  I know you want article links, but this at least illustrates that perhaps a dab is worth looking into.  Texas being the "Lone Star State" with 254 counties, the possibilities on multiple lakes of that name are pretty good.  — Maile ( talk ) 21:42, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There are clearly multiple places named Lone Star Lake—it's just that we only have information about one of them.  Entries on a disambiguation page without links to further information aren't helpful to readers.  We do have some set index articles about lakes , but this is (obviously) a disambiguation page, not a set index.  - Eureka Lott 21:53, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] ( edit conflict ) And I've removed them per WP:DABREF and WP:DABMENTION .  If you can incorporate information on these lakes into an existing article, or create a new article, then an entry can be added.  -- T avix ( talk ) 21:56, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Reclassify (and rename) as a set index on lakes (like others in Category:Set index articles on lakes , e.g. Bachelor Lake , which also has only one standalone article listed).  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 01:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The difference there is that all entries pass DABMENTION even though the mentions at most respective articles are unsourced (different issue).  Jay 💬 05:05, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 05:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Okay, what about Bass Lake (Ontario) , Bear Lake (Ontario) , Bear Lake (Oregon) , Lake Agnes (Minnesota) , etc.?  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 09:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Agree with Clarityfiend .  Convert to SIA and add references.  What would be the new title?  Jay 💬 07:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] List of lakes named Lone Star Lake : There are several entries in the category similarly named, e.g. List of lakes named Fish Lake .  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 11:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: While I don't want to relist this discussion a third time, except for the nominator, it's not clear to me what participants want from this closure among the limited options that are available.  If you want to "reclassify" or rewrite this article, you are going to have to voice support for Keeping it first.  After it is Kept, then changes can be made through editing but first we have to see support for a Keep.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  03:54, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Liz : I would see Keep as an implicit vote for Reclassify and Rename.  Jay 💬 05:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you, Jay .  That's pretty damn clear.  ;-) L iz Read!  Talk!  05:43, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as a start to a set index article as suggested above with good examples of standard practice for identically named lakes.  I think there are other geographic features for which SIAs exist as well.  — siro χ o 05:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And just to make it easier to notice for others, @ Maile66 has a revision here [18] that is a start of a set index article.  — siro χ o 05:53, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and transform into a set index article per above discussion.  The revision mentioned by @ Siroxo seems like a good start.  Above comments demonstrate precedence for this solution.  - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback ) 15:55, 13 August 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: keep