- 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 16:15, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Spook Cave
- Spook Cave ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable under Wikipedia:Notability_(geographic_features). No sources either. Bel-Shamharoth ( talk) 16:06, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Mz7 ( talk) 21:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Keep, a search of Google Books indicates chapter-length coverage in a variety of publications, satisfying WP:GEOLAND's requirement of "information beyond statistics and coordinates" for named natural features. I've added one ref (being the one the fickle Google Gods saw fit to give me access to) that verified most of the article's existing content, and could be used for further expansion. Antepenultimate ( talk) 19:05, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Thank you to Antepenultimate for adding the ref and developing the article. It's a tourist attraction, which pretty much makes it notable (no need for angry notes that that is not literally the policy, for whatever reason). -- do ncr am 23:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- 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.