Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyne Improvement Commission Docks and Piers Police


 * 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 redirect to Port of Tyne. Thank you User:Ninetyone for merging the appropriate information! Missvain (talk) 17:47, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Tyne Improvement Commission Docks and Piers Police

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I couldn't establish that this meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. It has been in CAT:NN's backlog for 12 years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Possible WP:ATD would be a merge to River Tyne Police, but I'm not sure it is worth adding. Boleyn (talk) 08:15, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge (to keep the redirect categorised) to Tyne Improvement Commission - the police force was a department of the Commission and did not have an existence independent from the Commission. The River Tyne Police were a separate body maintained by a separate public body, until they took over the responsibility for the duties of the TIC Police. ninety:one  18:25, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to Port of Tyne. As the creator many years ago, I can't see any value to Wikipedia in deleting information, but I don't have a big problem with a merger. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:49, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge per Ninetyone. Mccapra (talk) 11:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge assuming User:Ninetyone can covert the current general ref into footnote for verifiability? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The one ref on there looks verifiable but it is deep in a National Archives store somewhere. I've added some refreshed content to Port of Tyne using a WP:RS I have verified - the article is ready to be redirected to Port of Tyne now. (I've also significantly expanded River Tyne Police while I was at it, for which far more RSes exist.) ninety:one  17:53, 29 April 2021 (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.