Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clanton 14


 * 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 delete. Overall consensus is for deletion. North America1000 06:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Clanton 14

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:ORG. Not a lot of significant coverage by reliable third party sources. Page was sourced with dead links, unreliable sources and some WP:OR. They are old and they do exist, but don't seem that notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:45, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - this article is about a notable subject. WP:ORG isnt inclusive however. More input needed.BabbaQ (talk) 18:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If they're that notable, where is all the significant coverage? They pretty much exist, get arrested once in a while and that's it. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:22, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not finding substantial coverage by reliable sources. Hits in Google Books yield incidental mentions mainly focused on the formation of the breakaway 18th Street gang. The POLICE magazine reference has the deepest coverage. Not enough to satisfy GNG or WP:ORG by itself. • Gene93k (talk) 01:58, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete at best and Draft if needed, nothing suggesting the needed improvements. SwisterTwister   talk  05:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and . There just doesn't appear to be enough comprehensive coverage to satisfy notability guidelines. Chrisw80 (talk) 06:46, 28 April 2016 (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.