Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Doncram (talk | contribs)
reply above, and refine.
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 7: Line 7:
*'''Delete''' or '''Change to List''' - Seems to me that this article might survive as something like [[List of community gardens in Portland, Oregon]]. Seems so trivial though, and I'm having trouble seeing the references. Deletion wouldn't be bad either. [[User:NickCT|NickCT]] ([[User talk:NickCT|talk]]) 19:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' or '''Change to List''' - Seems to me that this article might survive as something like [[List of community gardens in Portland, Oregon]]. Seems so trivial though, and I'm having trouble seeing the references. Deletion wouldn't be bad either. [[User:NickCT|NickCT]] ([[User talk:NickCT|talk]]) 19:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
::Well it was just started. The Portland list has been referenced as a model already, at [[Talk:Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska]]. Notability of a list has already been established by discussion and references provided at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dundee Community Garden]]. Give it some time here. --[[User:doncram|<font color="maroon">do</font>]][[User talk:Doncram|<font color="green">ncr</font>]][[Special:Contributions/doncram|<font color="maroon">am</font>]] 22:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
::Well it was just started. The Portland list has been referenced as a model already, at [[Talk:Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska]]. Notability of a list has already been established by discussion and references provided at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dundee Community Garden]]. Give it some time here. --[[User:doncram|<font color="maroon">do</font>]][[User talk:Doncram|<font color="green">ncr</font>]][[Special:Contributions/doncram|<font color="maroon">am</font>]] 22:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
:::The Portland list isn't a good example of how this should progress: two years after it was started, one entry is sourced to Facebook, another to a dead link on a site probably associated with the garden, and the rest to one source, a directory, and there's no lead section or any prose outside of the list entries. [[User:Peter James|Peter James]] ([[User talk:Peter James|talk]]) 23:04, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Nebraska|list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 19:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)</small>
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Nebraska|list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 19:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)</small>
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists|list of Lists-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 19:29, 27 May 2014 (UTC)</small>
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists|list of Lists-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 19:29, 27 May 2014 (UTC)</small>

Revision as of 23:04, 27 May 2014

Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska (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)

I merged this newly-created list into Community gardens in Nebraska, but it has been recreated by its creator as a stand-alone article. There is insufficient content to justify two articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:54, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well it was just started. The Portland list has been referenced as a model already, at Talk:Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska. Notability of a list has already been established by discussion and references provided at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dundee Community Garden. Give it some time here. --doncram 22:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Portland list isn't a good example of how this should progress: two years after it was started, one entry is sourced to Facebook, another to a dead link on a site probably associated with the garden, and the rest to one source, a directory, and there's no lead section or any prose outside of the list entries. Peter James (talk) 23:04, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As I described in detail on the Talk:Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska page, merging a list of Omaha gardens into a Nebraska gardens entirely misses the point of Community gardening. Omaha has a vibrant group of community gardens which are interrelated and work together e.g. Tour de Gardens bike tour. A list of other gardens hundreds of miles away doesn't contribute to encyclopedic knowledge in any way, and obscures the significance of a community in community gardening. In response to User:Pigsonthewing's comment "insufficient content to justify two articles", the article that should be kept is the one that is actively being developed by a number of editors, the article about community gardening in Omaha. At no time has any editing whatsoever been done to a list of garden across the entire state, other than the creation of the page in response to the AfD discussion of the now-defunct Dundee Community Garden article.


- - - ScottHW (talk) 20:09, 27 May 2014 (UTC) - - -[reply]

Seriously, there is no need for far-away editors to apply attention here, it is just extending dramah. Let the editor(s) developing content on community gardens do what they want to do, and they will make sensible decision to merge in due time, if there is not sufficiently different material for two lists. If anyone wants to butt in, do contribute to the article, and/or comment at the ongoing merger proposal, a less confrontational medium than AFD. Assume good faith and some competence on the part of the productive editor(s). --doncram 22:41, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]