Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Rochelle Fire Department


 * 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   merge to  New Rochelle, New York. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 00:42, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

New Rochelle Fire Department

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no indication of notability. of course there are newspaper articles,it's a fire department. but there is no discussion here, and no indication of in a google news search, that this is anything other than a run of the mill fire department that every single city in this country has. John from Idegon (talk) 09:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 10:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge selectively to New Rochelle, New York – Fire Department. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 10:11, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Imagine, this city has a fire department noted for being available 24/7, 365. Can't we speedy this as not notable? Now if they have a calender... Legacypac (talk) 11:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per User:Northamerica1000 above and this similar discussion at Articles for deletion/Oroville Fire Department. It would be good to have some guidance specifically about notability of Fire Departments, maybe posted to WP:FD, the Fire Service project page .  Gaff (talk) 20:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment As the nominator, I would NOT support a merge. I agree that some guidance somewhere about when a fire department is notable would be great, but as far as settlement articles go, 90%+ of the time, there is nothing useful to be added to an article by including copy on the local fire department.  Full time/volunteer is really the only thing that is generally important.  Possibly some history on especially note worthy fires or scandals, but that info could just as easily go in the history or controversies sections.  All this what I refer to as firecruft has no place.  This isn't firebuff wiki. Every city has a fire department. John from Idegon (talk) 20:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Calling other people's hard work "cruft" has no place in a collaborative project. Just because something is uninteresting to you doesn't make it garbage. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge - article currently has no independent sources, although plenty exist: . It also has excessive details in places.  Certainly, a lot of information can be cut (and other information such as history added), but it is silly to say the only thing worth mentioning on Wikipedia is whether it is full time or volunteer...  At current, I lean merge because of sourcing, but definitely believe there is way more than 1 sentence that should be retained. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:Notability. The sources cited by ThaddeusB mention the department only in passing. GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:21, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge to New Rochelle, New York Not enough independent, in-depth sources to justify a standalone article (fails all notability guidelines I can think of), but there is enough verifiable information to retain somewhere else.  Would benefit by trimming, but I found the bulk of the information presented to be interesting.    78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 15:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 23 January 2015 (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.