Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Temagami diamond mine

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. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 11:19, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Temagami diamond mine

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

As I have said on the article's talk page, I did a quick Google search and found nothing about a diamond mine in the Temagami area. As a local resident, it is safe for me to say this article is a hoax and should be deleted. If this "diamond mine" was one of the largest in Canada and in the world it would surely be notable, but the lack of reliable sources contradicts that claim and everything else in this article. The article's creator (User:Bine Mai) originally used this as a source but does not support the content in the article. Volcanoguy 02:17, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't say for certain that this is an intentional hoax, but I can say that no reliable sources seem to mention the existence of this supposed mine. Nwlaw63 (talk) 05:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:57, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Hard to say much about intent with a substub like this, but this seems to confuse a couple of properties. There was a Temagami Mine that operated until the 1970s but did not produce diamonds. There is the very large Victor Diamond Mine, but it is a considerable distance to the northwest and is in no way associated with Temagami. And there is the North Temamami Diamond Property, part of the Lake Timiskaming kimberlite field and an area under consideration for future development (with some survey mines already established), but no large operating diamond mine in any sense. Whatever the goal was here, the result is an article for a subject that does not exist. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 20:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The author appears to have written other dubious mine articles. Check out it's contributions. Volcanoguy 10:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There's a whole lot of very bad, and frequently demonstrably incorrect content associated with this user. I'm not sure what the best venue is for raising the issue, but there's a lot of cleanup needed here. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:34, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The source that was cited for the article certainly demonstrates that there is exploration of possible diamond deposits in the Temagami area, but it absolutely, unequivocally fails to demonstrate that there's any active diamond mine. (And I grew up in Sudbury, to boot, so if there were actually a diamond mine in Temagami I'd know almost as much about it as Volcanoguy would.) Delete; until such time as there's actually a mine in actual operation, the correct place for any Wikipedia content about this would be Lake Timiskaming kimberlite field rather than a standalone article. Bearcat (talk) 07:34, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is talk of prospecting and plenty of market speculation but to date no producing mine. Atrian (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2013 (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.