Talk:Peak Eight

Doesn't exist

Peak 8 is not an unincorporated community, its a mountain in the siskiyou wilderness. Someone needs to delete this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.38.51.159 (talk) 01:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

• Peak Eight does exist as a populated place according to the USGS (which is cited in the article). Any proposal to delete this article should be taken to AfD. • Gene93k (talk) 13:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Well it doesn't exit on the ground, look on the maps or google earth if you don't believe me. rather than deleting every attempt I make to fix this error could you submit it to afd for me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.38.54.173 (talk) 22:59, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for approaching the talk page. Peak Eight is, as you say, certainly a geological feature, there's fairly good referencing for that in Gbooks in discussions of the controversy over the Gasquet-Orleans Road. [1], [2]. The other editors are right that USGS also lists it as a populated place, which is perhaps an error or (I think this is less likely) perhaps they're both true. I've asked someone more familiar with the USGS data source and geographic referencing to take a look, but this will get sorted out. Thank you for coming to the talk page and explaining what the concern is. Best, --joe decker^{talk to me} 03:33, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

PS--It may be that the correct solution is fixing the content to refer to the peak, rather than outright deletion. --joe decker^{talk to me} 03:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Populated place?

Here's the sourcing I have:

1. USGS's database says it's a populated place.
2. Gmaps shows that the location involved is at an elevation maxima
3. A half a dozen or so [3] books list it as a peak or a rock outcropping
4. Some journal articles appear to make the same claim
5. None of the book sources I've found describe any population there, instead, describing it as a place people retreat to for solo spiritual journeys
6. At least one source describes the area involved as wilderness
7. No signs of settlement in the area visible

I conclude that it's likely that this is not a populated area, and would suggest removing that claim based on the full weight of the evidence shown. But I'd prefer consensus before making the change. What say you? --joe decker^{talk to me} 04:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Depending on USGS definitions, it may well be a populated place, though that population may be very small. It may be more suitable to have this article about the peak, and then have a population section. 08OceanBeach^S.D. 05:29, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Certainly no objection as far as that goes, and in fact I've moved the article some in that direction already. --joe decker^{talk to me} 01:43, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I got a note back from the USGS! Thank you for this notification. Yes, it was a classification error, and we have made the change from Populated Place to Summit in the entry in the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS), the nation’s official geographic names repository. The corrected entry might take as long as two days to show at that website; click on the name itself to view the full entry and map options. By the way, the official name is Peak Eight. Thank you once again for your interest. --joe decker^{talk to me} 02:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Perfect! 08OceanBeach^S.D. 02:34, 20 April 2011 (UTC)