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 redirect to Irvine, Kentucky. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:01, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet Lick, Kentucky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Between Rennick's index and the topographic maps, this is either a very small stream named Sweet Lick Branch, or a small hill named Sweet Lick Knob. Given that neither are exact name matches, and information beyond coordinates and the fact that it exists (and that it's unclear if this is the hill or the creek), I'd say this fails WP:GEOLAND by a mile. Either way, the claim that this is an unincorporated community appears to be blatantly false. Hog Farm Bacon 01:53, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 01:53, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm Bacon 01:53, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:33, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Appears to have been a transcription error by GNIS. There are two features on the map called Sweet Lick: Sweet Lick Knob, a small hill and Sweet lick, a small stream that flows into White Oak Creek. The location of this supposed settlement is exactly on top of the label for the stream in the USGS 1:24,000 scale topographic maps, which are what Rennick was annotating with place names. The settlement nearby is clearly identified as "Irvine" or "North Irvine". If either the hill or stream are notable then an article should be recreated to cover them but it appears this settlement is fictitious. 86.23.86.239 (talk) 23:11, 8 October 2020 (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.