| Revision as of 05:42, 14 January 2018 editJohnpacklambert (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers600,155 edits →Yantacaw Brook Park, New Jersey← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:05, 14 January 2018 edit undoAlansohn (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers504,529 edits Merge / Redirect to Montclair, New Jersey, with another big, wet trout slap for Rusf10 for refusal to comply with WP:BEFORENext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ]. ] (]) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)</small> | :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ]. ] (]) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Delete''' This municipal park does not meet notability guidelines.] (]) 05:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' This municipal park does not meet notability guidelines.] (]) 05:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Merge / Redirect to ]''' Sadly, the nominator patently refuses to comply with ], which requires seeking alternatives to deletion. Furthermore, the box that displays above this page when editing rather clearly states '''"When discussing an article, remember to 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."'''{{pb}}"Why?" is indeed the question. Why do we continue to tolerate the abuse of process here at AfD from an editor who refuses to comply with policy? ] (]) 06:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:05, 14 January 2018
Yantacaw Brook Park, New Jersey
- Yantacaw Brook Park, New Jersey (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)
This is a municipal park, it does not meet WP:GNG. There is no sourcing other than link to a list of Montclair parks. The contents of the article seem to be original research WP:OR. Also does not meet criteria for inclusion as per WP:NOTTRAVEL. DEPRODED by User:Djflem because the article has existed since 2008. Longevity is never a valid reason to keep an article. Rusf10 (talk) 23:42, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
- Delete -- Fails GNG. Rhadow (talk) 02:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Delete This municipal park does not meet notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Merge / Redirect to Montclair, New Jersey Sadly, the nominator patently refuses to comply with WP:BEFORE, which requires seeking alternatives to deletion. Furthermore, the box that displays above this page when editing rather clearly states "When discussing an article, remember to 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?" is indeed the question. Why do we continue to tolerate the abuse of process here at AfD from an editor who refuses to comply with policy? Alansohn (talk) 06:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)