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 delete. After relisting, consensus has developed that the article fails WP:OR and doesn't have proper attribution for copying within Wikipedia. ansh666 19:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Frontier Strip

[edit]
Frontier Strip (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The phrase "frontier strip" appears to have been invented solely for this Wikipedia namespace. I can not find any historical or scholarly examples of the phrase "frontier strip" being used in relation to the United States, and as far as I can tell the phrase "frontier strip" does not appear in any of the article's listed references . The small number of Google search hits (regular search, books and scholar) for "frontier strip" appear to be traceable back to this article, with the exception of some references that are clearly about other countries.

In sum, this page's definition of a "frontier strip" is not a recognized grouping of U.S. states. In addition, the general topic is already thoroughly reviewed by American frontier and other state and regional pages. Thomas H. White (talk) 15:41, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 15:45, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Dakota-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 15:46, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Dakota-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 15:46, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree--it should be deleted. I cannot find any usage. Rjensen (talk) 15:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 15:49, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 15:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oklahoma-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 15:53, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 15:55, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Babymissfortune 16:03, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:07, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How about renaming to History of the Great Plains or History of the American Great Plains (I think the former is better right now, since American Great Plains redirects to Great Plains). This would be a minor repurposing, with frontier strip replaced with great plains in the text and the image perhaps replaced with File:Map of the Great Plains.png. The description section doesn't really have anything not in Great Plains, and this page would, I think, be better kept separate but referred to in the history section of that article. Smmurphy(Talk)
While most of the article deals with history, some things would not fit into an article titled "History of". That's why I'd prefer renaming to "American Great Plains" with a hatnote at the top going to the existing "Great Plains" article.--Rusf10 (talk) 15:45, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but American Great Plains already exists (is a redirect to Great Plains). As I meant to say, the non-history stuff from this article could be merged into that article, except it is already there, so it can just be trimmed in this article. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:13, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus yet on a possible renaming or merge target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ansh666 03:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, most of your contributions will be retained in the articles from which they were copied. –dlthewave 16:33, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, but destroy the history; Cheers --J. D. Redding 20:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss whether merging or deletion is preferred.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TonyBallioni (talk) 16:55, 29 December 2017 (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.