I seem to have caused a bit of a stir on the AfD for the article Ghost
ramp. I commented that if the Keep advocates don't fix the
fundamental problems identified with the article at its previous AfD
two months ago - which are: no reliable source for the name, no
reliable source for the description and all the inclusions sourced to
maps and satellite photos, i.e. original research - then I will delete
it as original research.
Since the AfD was started there have been only three edits to the
article, and the only sources added are of the same kind. Am I really
completely off-base in thinking that direct interpretation of maps and
satellite photos is original research? I can't really see it as
anything else.
Ghost ramp is an interesting topic, but we do have these policies...
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG