The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep‎. No support for Deletion and a weak deletion rationale that doesn't indicate BEFORE has been done. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shelby Township, Shelby County, Iowa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Shelby Township, Shelby County, Iowa does not even meet WP:GNG Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 01:32, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• This has White 1915, pp. 216–217 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFWhite1915 (help) in one county history and Dunbar 1889, pp. 237–238 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFDunbar1889 (help) in the other, both specifically on the township, as well as other information dotted throughout those. Then there are things like the Iowa Secretary of State publishing population and housing statistics for Iowa broken down by township. Uncle G (talk) 04:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Secretary of State information on statistics isn't in-depth discussion of the townships and doesn't make them notable, and clicking those links brings me back to this page. The link text doesn't even give enough information for a person to try to track them down to see the coverage. Why not add them to the pages as sources, so the sources can justify the pages' existence? That would cost about the same amount of effort as having posted here but the benefit would be greater.. Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:45, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iowa. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, not notable per the specific guidance at WP:NTOWN: "…if the class of division is not notable (e.g. townships in certain US states) its members are not notable either, even though technically recognized in law." I₂Overcome ^talk 19:58, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Oona Wikiwalker There are 1,599 townships in Iowa and almost all of them have articles; from a quick sampling it appears that most of them are stubs that may also fail WP:NTOWN. I suggest you withdraw these five nominations and nominate the lot of them if you still think they should be deleted. See WP:BUNDLE for instructions, but you would probably still have to individually tag several hundred pages. The AutoWikiBrowser would make that less tedious, but you have to request permission to use it if you haven’t already. For these five individually, Strong Keep. I₂Overcome ^talk 20:27, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Then how do you suggest getting townships where very few people live, which have nothing of note in their history, out of the backlog of places for which geographic coordinates have been requested? There's no way to note why they're in the backlog or whether or not they're worthy of note. Alternatively, where do you suggest the coordinates should point? Whose property or home? Geographic center? Last UFO sighting? (I'm making these jokes as someone who comes from one of these places where all you have to talk to is the grass and sky.) Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 20:08, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • It seems quite clear that you have not looked at the county histories to know what is in them, even though I explicitly pointed them out with the precise page numbers of the more concentrated stuff therein, especially as I pointed to the different things for each individual township and you are just in contrast copy-pasting generic comments. Uncle G (talk) 00:54, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per grounds of I2Overcome. Structurally speaking we have thousands of township articles as the primary next level subdivision of United States counties, judging each individually would create an absolute incoherent mess.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 12:31, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*redirect to list of townships in Shelby County, Iowa or maybe delete outright. I'm not rehashing the group nom discussion again so we can get right on to this place's notability. In the 2002 election results, 27 people voted for the clerk position. It's obviously next to impossible to do a good search for this place, but I'm seeing a WP:GNG fail here and the history of results for these minor subdivisions has not been to grant them blanket immunity from deletion. Mangoe (talk) 12:36, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• • I gave two of the county histories right at the beginning of this discussion, with the precise page numbers for the more concentrated stuff, which saves on the searching considerably. You and I both know where the county histories will be found, having done this for years. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 00:54, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2025 (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.