Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Long Bayou


 * 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. North America1000 03:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Long Bayou

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:GNG. Only sources are a web page for the group and one for one of the condos. No coverage from independent reliable sources. The author could not find any independent references either but claims notability is established because of its size (4 condo developments with over 1000 residents). There is no in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to meet our policy requirements for inclusion. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 23:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:32, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:32, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure yet but just a heads up to some of the usual suspects here at Afd: Google does reveal lots of hits for various things called "long bayou." Care must be taken to be sure that those results are for the subdivision in Florida. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:57, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - There is nothing notable about this condo or any major events that I can find occurred here. There are thousands of condo associations, unless there is notability they shouldn't be listed. FirstDrop87 (talk) 01:47, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Searching turns up plenty of real estate listings, but nothing else. Seems to be a entirely un-notable condo complex.  MB 03:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:49, 27 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete – Doesn't pass WP:GNG, per above comments.  Adog 104  Talk to me 12:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This is pretty much one of those condo pages masquerading as a place. I have seen this happening multiple times and I vote for keep only if a certain importance about the condo can be demonstrated. This case fails WP:GEOFEAT so accordingly, delete. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 00:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG -- Dane 2007  talk 20:47, 2 September 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.