# Talk:Headreach Island

Where is the line drawn for writing an independent article for an island, as opposed to including it in an article on the group of islands of which it is part? Please ping with reply, Cheers,· · · Peter Southwood (talk): 08:44, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Pbsouthwood: Well, if I just wrote an article for everything that had a GNIS entry and a recognizable presence on a satellite map, I'd be up a few thousand from where I'm at now ;^)
In all seriousness, I try to follow the guidance given by WP:NGEO; I will only bother to go all the way on writing an article if I can be reasonably sure in my ability to find reliable sources that give actual information about the island. There are a few (I'm looking at Fern Island (California) here) which definitely exist, but not quite enough to pass GNG, or know anything about them beyond coordinates, elevation, etc. As my skills improve, I've been finding it easier and easier to write solid articles (for example, Fox Island (Detroit River) was in my "unexpandable permastub" list until a couple days ago). As for this specific article, there is indeed some overlap with Tule Island; I think this is more attributable to the speed at which I'm going through my "list of articles to expand" than to a lack of citable material that's distinct between the two. jp×g 13:30, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply JPxG, My query is not about the notability, more about assessment of how likely the article is to become reasonably substantial within a reasonable time, rather than remaining a stub, versus the option of inclusion as a section in the containing geographical unit, with a redirect with possibilities for later expansion. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 14:00, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
I assume that in this case, you're referring to the complex formed by Headreach Island, Tule Island and Fern Island? jp×g 14:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)