Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beverly Square East, Brooklyn


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   merge to Victorian Flatbush.  MBisanz  talk 22:59, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Beverly Square East, Brooklyn

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article tagged as of doubtful notability and unreferenced for 5 years Boleyn (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep but create Victorian Flatbush for context. (I may do that.) A bit of digging confirmed that both this and Beverly Square West, Brooklyn, both created by the same editor and with virtually identical wording, should be at the "Beverley" spelling, as used in their text. There is coverage in the New York Times of the group of neighborhoods, which for added complexity are now usually grouped under Ditmas Park. Some of them have better articles, such as Fiske Terrace; here's a New York Times article clearly explaining it all, with specific coverage of Beverley Square East (and West), here's the Epoch Times, here's more New York Times coverage. Yngvadottir (talk) 05:27, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge into either Ditmas Park or Victorian Flatbush. This one development isn't notable escept as a part of a larger set of Flatbush developments that now make up the neighborhood of Ditmas Park. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fitnr (talk • contribs) 15:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. Someone moved it to Beverley Square East, Brooklyn and I have now moved the other article to Beverley Square West, Brooklyn to match. I've created Victorian Flatbush and started improving this article with more information and sources; I will similarly expand and reference Beverley Square West. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.