| Revision as of 01:05, 20 January 2018 editRusf10 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,121 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:10, 20 January 2018 edit undoUnscintillating (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,833 edits →George Street Co-op: speedily keepNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| *'''Questions for nominator''' 1) We've heard from participants here who have found sources, yet there is no apparent effort to have complied with ]. Where is the analysis of potential sources and alternatives to improve the article? Simply asserting that "Your assessment of the sources is false", without any evidence of an appropriate good-faith effort to find sources, accomplishes nothing. 2) The header for this AfD -- and every other one in Misplaced Pages -- states that the nominator must '''"... consider alternatives to deletion. If you think the article could be a disambiguation page, redirected or merged to another article, then consider recommending "Disambiguation", "Redirect" or "Merge" instead of deletion. Similarly, if another editor has proposed an alternative to deletion but you think the article should be deleted instead, please elaborate why."''' Why has the nominator not considered a merge / redirect? ] (]) 20:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC) | *'''Questions for nominator''' 1) We've heard from participants here who have found sources, yet there is no apparent effort to have complied with ]. Where is the analysis of potential sources and alternatives to improve the article? Simply asserting that "Your assessment of the sources is false", without any evidence of an appropriate good-faith effort to find sources, accomplishes nothing. 2) The header for this AfD -- and every other one in Misplaced Pages -- states that the nominator must '''"... consider alternatives to deletion. If you think the article could be a disambiguation page, redirected or merged to another article, then consider recommending "Disambiguation", "Redirect" or "Merge" instead of deletion. Similarly, if another editor has proposed an alternative to deletion but you think the article should be deleted instead, please elaborate why."''' Why has the nominator not considered a merge / redirect? ] (]) 20:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
| ::Okay genius, what is the merge/redirect target for this one, I give up. Do not tell me its ] because it certainly is not a major part of that city. A few local newspaper articles that amount to little more than a restaurant review does not clear the bar for ] A **]** search didn't reveal much else. So unless you or someone else want to add better references to the article or post them here, do NOT claim that I did not do a before search. I have a theory that you actually copied and pasted your response here without looking at the sources.--] (]) 22:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC) | ::Okay genius, what is the merge/redirect target for this one, I give up. Do not tell me its ] because it certainly is not a major part of that city. A few local newspaper articles that amount to little more than a restaurant review does not clear the bar for ] A **]** search didn't reveal much else. So unless you or someone else want to add better references to the article or post them here, do NOT claim that I did not do a before search. I have a theory that you actually copied and pasted your response here without looking at the sources.--] (]) 22:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Speedily Keep''' as per ]. This is another "I have the right to nominate articles on New Jersey and nearby states" nomination. The nominator has attempted the outing of a New Jersey editor and claimed "I have not provided any information not volunteered in the past." Never mind that the nominator has been previously explicitly warned to not attempt outing. The nominator has told the target of his/her attempted outing, "quite frankly I do not care what you think" The nominator has gotten an editor from a topic related to New Jersey indeffed for being an AfD meatpuppet. The nominator took two editors from New Jersey to ANI on 23 December 2017, which is where some editors became aware that the nominator has said, "List of people from Teaneck, New Jersey should not exist and neither should about half the articles on that list." Challenged about nominating New Jersey articles, of creating "unnecessary articles". ] (]) 05:10, 20 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:10, 20 January 2018
George Street Co-op
- George Street Co-op (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)
Not notable, fails WP:ORG and a search reveals very few sources, not enough to establish notability. Rusf10 (talk) 07:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. 09:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. 09:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. 09:35, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Keep A search reveals plenty of good sources. The nomination is false. Andrew D. (talk) 18:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Your assessment of the sources is false. There are very few sources that have more than a passing mention.--Rusf10 (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- FYI, - Added another source and working on a few more from the local NJ news outlets. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Your assessment of the sources is false. There are very few sources that have more than a passing mention.--Rusf10 (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Keep -Notable and reliably sourced, even if it is currently a stub, that is no reason for deletion. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Questions for nominator 1) We've heard from participants here who have found sources, yet there is no apparent effort to have complied with WP:BEFORE. Where is the analysis of potential sources and alternatives to improve the article? Simply asserting that "Your assessment of the sources is false", without any evidence of an appropriate good-faith effort to find sources, accomplishes nothing. 2) The header for this AfD -- and every other one in Misplaced Pages -- states that the nominator must "... consider alternatives to deletion. If you think the article could be a disambiguation page, redirected or merged to another article, then consider recommending "Disambiguation", "Redirect" or "Merge" instead of deletion. Similarly, if another editor has proposed an alternative to deletion but you think the article should be deleted instead, please elaborate why." Why has the nominator not considered a merge / redirect? Alansohn (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Okay genius, what is the merge/redirect target for this one, I give up. Do not tell me its New Brunswick, New Jersey because it certainly is not a major part of that city. A few local newspaper articles that amount to little more than a restaurant review does not clear the bar for WP:GNG A **WP:BEFORE** search didn't reveal much else. So unless you or someone else want to add better references to the article or post them here, do NOT claim that I did not do a before search. I have a theory that you actually copied and pasted your response here without looking at the sources.--Rusf10 (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Speedily Keep as per WP:DGFA. This is another "I have the right to nominate articles on New Jersey and nearby states" nomination. The nominator has attempted the outing of a New Jersey editor and claimed "I have not provided any information not volunteered in the past." Never mind that the nominator has been previously explicitly warned to not attempt outing. The nominator has told the target of his/her attempted outing, "quite frankly I do not care what you think" The nominator has gotten an editor from a topic related to New Jersey indeffed for being an AfD meatpuppet. The nominator took two editors from New Jersey to ANI on 23 December 2017, which is where some editors became aware that the nominator has said, "List of people from Teaneck, New Jersey should not exist and neither should about half the articles on that list." Challenged about nominating New Jersey articles, in this diff, the nominator accuses a creator of New Jersey articles of creating "unnecessary articles". Unscintillating (talk) 05:10, 20 January 2018 (UTC)