Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bronx Community Board 8


 * 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 redirect to Community boards of the Bronx. Content remains behind the redirect for very selective merge to the target. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Bronx Community Board 8

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't appear to be notable, no sourcing found Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:39, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 16:17, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 16:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Why this board in particular, and not the other 58? Station1 (talk) 23:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
 * because it was the first I found when doing a cleanup run. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep In a city of 8.5 million, community boards serve a critical function of representative government in each of the five boroughs of New York City. While each of the 58 articles has different levels of sourcing included within each of them, the overall community board structure in general, and this article in particular, are all notable. Sourcing available outside the article should be added. Alansohn (talk) 12:55, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete- Most of the article just describes how community boards work (not this one in particular). Almost everything in this article is already in Community boards of New York City and Community boards of the Bronx. How many articles do we need that just repeat each other?--Rusf10 (talk) 15:48, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete -- non notable. The article offers three citation, all of which are to gov web site (primary source) and are not suitable for establishing notability. The page reads like the org's web site (Membership, Board Responsibilities, etc), which is where such content belongs. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ansh 666 02:20, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * delete The complete lack of narrative emphasizes the points made above: this is an article about community boards may do, but there's nothing about this board and what it has done. "Why is this board different from any other board?": that question isn't answered, and therefore it appears that notability is lacking. Mangoe (talk) 16:19, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with Alansohn's reasoning. HugoHelp (talk) 19:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 *  Delete Selective merge to Community boards of the Bronx. There's nothing in this article that's not either totally boilerplate about NYC CB's, or just WP:DIRECTORY information.  Sure, CB's are important (I happen to live in CB-10), but that doesn't make them WP:N.  And, to ansswer Station1's question above, why not delete the other 58, my answer would be that we probably should.  -- RoySmith (talk) 01:48, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No objection to a merge/redirect per SoWhy, below. But, it would have to be a very selective merge.  My first thought was all that would be useful would be a list of communities covered, but I see that's there already.  Maybe just bring over the demographics info, and a link to the CB's website.  -- RoySmith (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Question: Why deletion and not redirect/merge to Community boards of the Bronx? Seems like this can and should be handled by WP:ATD (as can the other 58 if necessary without creating 58 more AFDs). Regards  So Why  11:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect - to Community boards of the Bronx as per 's reasoning. Definitely not notable enough for a standalone article. Have not looked at the other 58, but they also could be redirected if they do not meet notability guidelines, without going through the afd process.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:42, 24 January 2018 (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.