Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kings County Democratic County Committee


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Kings County Democratic County Committee

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article, which is about a county-level political party, lacks significant, independent and reliable sources and as such fails WP:GNG. TM 01:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - Significant coverage to be found in Brooklyn Democratic Party search. ~Kvng (talk) 02:25, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Will you provide links to such significant coverage? I just see mentions, not significant coverage.--TM 09:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * There are an enormous number of citations dealing with the tribulations of corrupt officials in the organization and I think those, in sum, establish notability for the organization. There are also sources that cover the organization more directly:, , , , , . ~Kvng (talk) 14:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Abstain - I abstain. Braum is my homeboy (talk) 03:37, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment You don't need to "Abstain", you can just not comment on the AfD! ThePlatypusofDoom  (Talk) 10:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a tricky one. Nom may have followed WP:BEFORE, but he needs to show us that he has looked at the topic, not the page.
 * 1.) nomination is not really valid, since the question at AFD is not whether "this article... lacks significant, independent and reliable sources," but whether the topic has them.
 * 2.) I leaned yes, after all, Brooklyn is bigger than most American cities and votes Democrat.
 * 3.) However, the page not indicate that any of the many sources brought discuss the Committee as a significant organization, beyond, that is, the functions any County-level committee performs.
 * 4.) Worse, I cannot find such sources. I thought that a quick search on google books would do it, or a news search , but the surprisingly tiny number of mentions of this committee are along the lines of, "a Midwood resident and a Kings County Democratic County Committee (AD45) member, ..."

E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Okay, I feel stupid. No wonder I couldn't find it.  Sources just brought above are persuasive, but by have to replace "King's County" with "Brooklyn" in all searches (New Yorkers undoubtedly don't even realize that this does not immediately occur to the rest of the world).  I do wish that the article creator would have worked on this at least hard enough to add a little material making the notability clear, because this AFD has been a total waste of everyone's time.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The article is titled after the official name of the organization, and the association with Brooklyn is noted in the first sentence. I figured that would be clear enough to "the rest of the world," sorry you found it so challenging. It is the person who nominated it for deletion who is wasting people's time. I put plenty of my own time into creating the article.Sylvain1972 (talk) 17:19, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The article was proposed for deletion (deprodded by me) and then WP:AFD by who apparently is not very good at recognizing potential controversy that makes WP:PROD inappropriate for such things or doing the necessary research WP:BEFORE nominating for deletion. Nor was  very good at finding sources even after I added a new Find sources to this page and pointed the way. Brooklyn Democratic Party is there in bold at the very beginning of the article so it is not authors fault if anyone had difficulty understanding what to search for. If you're not willing or able to do the work required from your side, please refrain from doing nominations. ~Kvng (talk) 00:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep For the reasons stated above. The article is well-sourced and the notability is clearly outlined.Sylvain1972 (talk) 17:19, 15 June 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.