Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oroville 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 Oroville, California. (non-admin closure)  Rcsprinter123    (confess)  @ 12:58, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Oroville Fire Department
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

insufficient references for notability ,and none would be expected for a town of such size. One fire station; 4 engines. Their most prominent event seems to have been a lumber yard fire causing relatively trivial damage and no injuries. The principle is NOT DIRECTORY.  DGG ( talk ) 19:21, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Unfortunately, I can't find the significant coverages to reliable sources that assert the subject notability. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 19:52, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 20:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: This was just discussed a few days ago. Articles for deletion/Oroville Fire Department (California). --Zackmann08.


 * Comment. How does wp:NOTDIRECTORY apply?  There is no directory-like list of anything included.
 * I closed the previous AFD early as a "Speedy Keep", based on article development, upon deletion nominator changing their mind, and there remaining just 2 Keep votes, no opposes. I don't mind this new AFD being opened right away;  I guess the decision was not obvious.  I'll offer that the IMPORTANCE of the topic for the Wikipedia is not really obvious to me, but didn't Wikipedia policy change, from requiring something like an assertion of importance, to merely requiring sources?  User:DGG, can you comment on what notability requirements now are, if I am missing something?  What's covered is supported, I believe.  And the 1928 fire coverage is interesting in linked source, and is about the performance of this fire department itself, in a publication apparently seeking to provide guidance/"lessons learned" type examples to fire fighters nation-wide.  Apparently this department did well to build some fire-line of green lumber boards, from what I understand from the source, rather than trying to save what could not be saved. -- do  ncr  am  22:18, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Notability is not the same as achievement. However, wikipedia keep articles on the basis of WP:Notability . Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 01:08, 16 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: The previous AfD rationale for the article's deletion did not provide a valid reason for deletion but reasons to cleanup. I guess that was why voted its keep and cleanup in the first instance (not too sure, I might be wrong). However, it doesn't seemed to me that the issue of the subject notability was addressed in that discussion. However,  Comments; Hello. I was hoping you could help me. I saw your comments regarding my nomination of Oroville Fire Department (California) for deletion. There is something I have never understood about the process and I was hoping you could help me understand  on  talk page and their vote here as Keep suggested that  don't really understand certain guidelines and policy.
 * Non-admin closure of the previous discussion seemed not to be a good one to me. The fact that an article nominator withdrew their nomination is not enough to Non-admin close discussion like this. Certain factors needs to be put into considerations such as weather the subject actually meet WP:GNG or other criteria. If the article appears to fail WP:GNG, it can be re-nominated for a better consensus to be reached. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 01:08, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, your view about closure noted. -- do ncr  am  01:34, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * In defense of User:doncram's decision to close the AfD, it technically met criteria #1 for a Speedy keep and per WP:NAC, that is an appropriate closure. As with any NAC, the AfD can certainly be re-opened. Gaff (talk) 01:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Common sense is above any policy. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 14:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * When an AfD is withdrawn by the nominator and there are no other delete votes, it is routinely closed. did absolutely nothing wrong.  Indeed, what you are asking (for the closer to substitute their own judgement for that of the commenters) actually is against policy.  Of course, doncram could have offered his opinion as a regular !vote if he wanted, but as the AfD stood there was absolutely no reason not to close it. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep or less favored Merge with City of Oroville? or delete for fails WP:GNG : My original keep and cleanup was in response to the reasons suggested for the initial AfD. I added some content, a few refs and cleaned up the article, but have since been otherwise occupied.  In response to comments above, that I do not understand certain guidelines, that is not necessarily true (but none of us are perfect).  By the way, can somebody fix the formatting on the comments above? It is getting tough to read who said what when... Gaff (talk) 01:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response, that comment was not actually directed to you but . I was a bit in a hurry. Of course your edit history shows that you have a better understanding of the core wikipedia guidelines and policies. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 01:55, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * On second thought, reliable secondary sources have been provided to support the notability of this topic. Whether or not it is a stand alone article or is merged with the city article can be debated on the talk pages of the respective articles.  This article should be kept and this AfD closed (again). Gaff (talk) 16:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * In addition, regarding the trivialization of the damage caused by the fire: that is a very WP:POV statement.  For this small, relatively remote, and not wealthy  community, the fire would have been simply cataclysmic.  It probably created substantial hardship for the owner of the lumber yard, the people working there, and the entire community.Gaff (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Oroville, California. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:15, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge to Oroville, California – Fire department. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 19:39, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge - article is actually in pretty good shape. Whether the information should be retained as a stand-alone article or as part of the city article makes little difference, but it should definitely be retained. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge to the city article and drop the trivia of 1921.--Milowent • hasspoken 20:37, 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.