Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junior Seau Beach Community Center and Bandshell


 * 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   no consensus. No (remaining) delete opinions. Opinion is split between merge to Oceanside Pier and keep; this can continue to be discussed on the talk page.  Sandstein  05:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Junior Seau Beach Community Center and Bandshell

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

no evidence for notability of this minor local venue.  DGG ( talk ) 07:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm not seeing enough sources to satisfy WP:GNG. Seems like news due to renaming in honor of the late Junior Seau.  Per this source, there are two separate buildings, the Beach Community Center and the Pier Amphitheater, named after Seau.  I would otherwise say redirect to Junior Seau, except I'm not sure the name "Bandshell" in the title is even valid.—Bagumba (talk) 09:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Oceanside Pier per Arxiloxos below. Removal of unsourced "bandshell" name should be done;  there should be one redirect for the community center, and another for the amphitheater.—Bagumba (talk) 17:40, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Source below mentions band shell. Might be informal name, but I'll strike it being unsourced.  Still see no reason why both are needed in the title.  They are separate, aside for being named after Seau.—Bagumba (talk) 18:13, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The Oceanside Bandshell, or alternatively Oceanside Amphitheater, was in fact the name of that structure before its recent renaming. --MelanieN (talk) 16:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Oceanside Pier. The band shell, aka ampitheater, has been a significant local venue for decades (note, for example, this 2009 story about proposed renovation efforts, well before Junior's death), and is also something of a cheerleading landmark since it was used as a set for Bring it On, but I think it makes more sense to use this material to improve the existing article about the pier. Unfortunately, one problem that currently confronts all efforts to improve San Diego County articles is that a portion of the online resources relating to the recently sold (and inelegantly renamed) U-T San Diego seem to have disappeared recently.  This is not the first time that I've run a GNews search for a San Diego topic and gotten results with promising excerpts, only to run into a lot of "404" pages for Union-Tribune materials.--Arxiloxos (talk) 15:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You can try taking the article title from google and then go to utsandiego.com and search on the title there. —Bagumba (talk) 17:40, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * With regard to the Bandshell being a significant local venue, it is also where graduation ceremonies are held for Oceanside High School, and it frequently hosts large concert events and an annual Tea Party rally. Maybe those details could be merged into this article to enhance it? (add a "History" section?) Gwsuperfan (talk) 18:21, 8 July 2012 (UTC)


 * How soon does this need to be decided? the Beach Community Center and Bandshell are separate from the Pier, so I'm not sure that merging into that article is appropriate. I am in the process of contacting experts from the Oceanside Historical Society regarding the issue, and would defer to them on whether the 3 structures (Pier, Bandshell, and Community Center) should be considered a single complex, or if they should be considered separate. I would also like more time to continue to gather sources and flesh out the article before a decision is made. I was having to elbow my way between camera crews from several local stations and major networks to get pictures during the ceremony. Gwsuperfan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:00, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * AfDs usually stay open for a week. While consulting experts is great, articles ultimately need to be verifiable by reliable sources that other editors can access.—Bagumba (talk) 23:12, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment It's unlikely that we can find significant coverage under this name, since it was only named this yesterday! However it's possible that some features of the complex may be notable, per comments above. Maybe the whole article including the bandshell could be named for the community center, if sourcing for the complex can be found under its previous name(s). --MelanieN (talk) 02:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect to what? If we are considering a "merge and redirect" to the Oceanside Pier should this article, and the Pier article all be possibly merged into an article about the "Pier Complex," which would also include notes about restaurants, etc (the Tin Fish is in the process of renovating a location at the base of the Pier)? How far inland should the area encompassed by a "Pier Complex" article include? What about North and South along the beach? Should it include mentions of other facilities for recreation and other parks within 2 or 3 blocks? I think the idea of a "Merge and Redirect" is a slippery slope, however, I will admit to some potential bias being both an Oceanside resident, and someone who visits the area frequently, and someone who knew Junior Seau personally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwsuperfan (talk • contribs) 08:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:LOCAL is an applicable essay. We could merge to Oceanside Pier first.  That article could be moved later if needed, or perhaps be included summary style in a new article "Pier Complex" if warranted.—Bagumba (talk) 09:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Research suggested that the bandshell is historic. I have added references and historic information, as well as cleaning up and de-cluttering the article. Please take another look; I believe this complex is notable and is now demonstrated to be notable. --MelanieN (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I think a merge to the pier, probably with a rename as suggested above,  would be a good idea. I should have thought of this initially, but I didn't, I do not think it can stand as a separate article--the content is mostly trivial--the exact vote of the and the names of the dignitaries present at the rededication are not encyclopedic content.  DGG ( talk ) 14:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Melanie asked that I reconsider my comment. Even if the center is judged notable, I continue to think that which members of the city council voted for or against the project is not encyclopedic content & which local public officials were at the dedication is not encyclopedic content. This sort of bureaucratic trivia and namedropping is common in articles about organizations where there is insufficient actual material. Even when the organization is unquestionably notable, as for example a university, this is pure PR content, amounting to puffery. I normally remove it, as I do all puffery and PR. The work of professionals in public relations (on & off Wikipedia) trying to create publicity when there is nothing substantial has affected even the manner in which volunteers work.
 * However, her expansion of the information & referencing about the significance as a venue is possibly sufficient to make the subject notable--we have often but not always approved articles on such venues.  I would be willing to withdraw the AfD and simply edit the content, but there are other delete !votes.  DGG ( talk ) 19:52, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking another look. I agree with you that there is too much detail about the vote and the dedication ceremony. I put a note on the talk page of the article's author, he has responded, and I believe he and I can work together to make this into an article which is primarily about the facility, rather than about the renaming. For starters he agreed to get some pictures of the actual community center and bandshell, to replace pictures from the dedication, if the article is kept. --MelanieN (talk) 20:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:LOCAL advises "If some source material is available, but is insufficient for a comprehensive article, it is better to mention the subject under the article for its parent locality." I'm not sure how much more comprehensive this could get.  MelanieN has done well to add context, but can more be added aside from a running random list of all and any events ever held here?  Or name dropping of notable people sighted? Two sources, U-T San Diego and North Country Times is not enough for me to definitively agree that the multiple sources required by GNG.  I am all for WP:PRESERVE by redirecting and merging to "Oceanside Pier", with no prejudice to WP:SPLIT later if more comprehensive information is found.  Also, I still maintain that the Beach Community Center and the Pier Amphitheater are independent entities, bundled here superficailly only because of news of the renaming to honor Seau.  Linking them by their vicinity to the Oceanside Pier makes more sense to me.  Google archives is down for me now, so unfortunately I am able to explore if additional sources exist beyond what MelanieN has identified.—Bagumba (talk) 20:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your thoughts. Actually there are three different news sources cited, since there is a report from the local NBC station as well. (Not counting the merely fact-verifying links that don't add to notability.) But I think you are right that there is not a lot more to say. --MelanieN (talk) 20:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It could be considered part of the news spike more related to Seau; I'm still borderline, waiting for maybe another non-trivial source unrelated to Seau to sway me. I'm just not feeling it yet :-( —Bagumba (talk) 20:50, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * With Google News archives back up, I am not seeing anything additional beyond trivial mentions of it being the location for various events. I know that there are other articles on venues filled with random events hosted, but I'm not willing to support that lower standard for a standalone article.—Bagumba (talk) 23:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep as this is a notable part of the civil infrastructure of a major city.LuciferWildCat (talk) 22:01, 14 July 2012 (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.