Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zip Code 30052


 * 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. Delete all except Suffolk County, New York article. v/r - TP 00:30, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Zip Code 30052

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable zip code, prod removed with this reasoning" Removed marked for deletion. Individual zip codes are notable as geographic entity used for postal delivery.", no reliable sources for this zip code, there's tens of thousands of zip codes out there, and prior nominations indicated zip codes aren't notable Delete all Secret account 04:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Our precedent is not to have articles about individual zip codes. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not govern by precedent.  D r e a m Focus  01:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Precedent is a reflection of consensus, which does govern Wikipedia. Peacock (talk) 18:11, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Individual zip codes are not notable, as there are 99,999 of them, and they are pretty much the same. OK, 90210 is the exception that proves the rule.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  06:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * NOTE: added other ZIP code pages to the original nomination, as the came conditions apply to all of them (bar one, not nominated) - The Bushranger One ping only 09:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect all to the populated place they are associated with Delete all except Suffolk County. As the same conditions of the original nom apply to all ZIP code pages, I added them all to the nomination (bar 10048 (ZIP code), which is notable). But none of these are. They may have some utitlity as redirects (there are quite a few others already existing as redirects), however - but that would be just as the number itself, not as "Zip Code foo". - The Bushranger One ping only 09:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Unless they pass the GNG like 10048, which none of the nominated articles do, individual ZIP codes aren't notable. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 10:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete All as original research, Not Directory, no independent third-party published sources, or whatever criterion salves your conscience. With due respect to the creator, this is a kettle of fish best not opened. Carrite (talk) 18:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete All Unless reliable sources are produced that discuss a specific zip code as a topic in itself, as is the case for 10048. There will be a tiny number of exceptions at best.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  02:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep all All zip codes are evidently notable, being discussed in detail in works such as Community Sourcebook of ZIP Code Demographics and Rand McNally zip code atlas. In many cases, the zip code seems to correspond to a particular named town or district and so some merger or redirection might be appropriate.  Indiscriminate deletion of zip codes just seems to be WP:IDONTLIKEIT unsupported by any policy. Warden (talk) 12:57, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete all: Indeed the Zip codes are listed in several publications but that does not make them notable in their own right and we already have List of ZIP code prefixes where each 3-digit Zip code links to the populated place. ww2censor (talk) 15:49, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * They are not just listed but are discussed in detail. That does make them notable, by definition, per the WP:GNG.  The suggestions to the contrary above are factually incorrect. Warden (talk) 16:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The sources you listed are primary sources, like an atlas, not the secondary sources that meets WP:GNG Secret account 19:21, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Delete all per general notability guidelines. All these individual zip codes are definitely not notable geographic entities. Peacock (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep One of the things Wikipedia strives for is to be an almanac. These could be useful for someone looking up information about what areas are in zip code.  Rather educational really.  I say keep all of them, and please don't go around trying to delete the many other zip code related articles out there either. Category:Postal codes by country   D r e a m Focus  01:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not true, we don't strive to be an almanac, that's why WP:NOT exists. Can you give a policy based reasoning please. Secret account 03:38, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Five pillars "Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. It incorporates elements of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers." That's been there since the very beginning of Wikipedia I believe.  I thought it was listed somewhere else too, but can't find it.   D r e a m Focus  08:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Fruit punch "incorporates elements of" an apple orchard, but is not trying to be an apple orchard. To reach this purported imagined "almanac" status, we need articles on all of the individual telephone exchanges in the country (which, of course, cover far larger areas than mere zip codes), each Social Security number range (covering areas limited by state, of course, but also covering (in some cases) employment), etc. I'd suggest we get started with an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of keyboards creating random articles. Then we can keep every conceivable variation of Hamletand every code (zip, phone or otherwise) used by anyone anywhere. After all, where else am I going to find every meaningless detail about the history of 12 gauge lamp wire? - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * List of North American Numbering Plan area codes Have them for each individual state as well, plus other nations. Social Security numbers are randomly generated these days.  Previously they just used the zip code for them.   D r e a m Focus  15:50, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, we have one article listing area codes. I'm talking about individual articles for each exchange (If you'd like one article listing every zip code in the country, knock yourself out.). Yes, SSNs are randomly generated, except that they aren't. The first three digits are now based on area, the fifth is (now) even and the last four are sequential. In the past (once notable, always notable), the first three had some that were area and occupation (such as Pennsylvania RR employees). Surely this would be part of our newly invented mission as an almanac. You'd better start rounding up monkeys. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 18:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * They are random now. Read the part starting at "On June 25, 2011, the SSA changed the SSN assignment process to "SSN randomization"".  Any yes, every area code has its own article.  Click on any of the numbers listed and you can find articles like Area code 205.  We also have additional articles on this, not just one, which you can find listed at Template:Area code list.  And we have too many monkeys around already, no sense trying to round up more.   D r e a m Focus  18:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "Once notable, always notable." The previous meaning hidden in SSNs is as important to this newly invented almanac mission as it was when certain SSNs were allocated to employees of the Pennsylvania RR, etc. Assign some monkeys. No matter how many times you talk about area codes, I'm talking about telephone exchanges which are of a scope similar to these trivial zip codes for our new almanac mission. We'll have to allocate monkeys to this. And there are thousands of similarly trivial codes to attend to. Heck, let's just start Wikimonkeyalmanac - the meaningless compendium of trivial details attached to every code number any organization has ever used and call it a day. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 19:00, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * In case it isn't clear, a telephone exchange is the second three-number group in a 10-digit phone number: 1-407-555-1234 is, in order, country code, area code, exchange, individual number. (Yes, every time you dial long-distance starting with '1', you're entering the country code. You could win trivia games with this. :D ) The trouble with claming that zip codes are notable enough for articles because area codes are (aside from it being a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument) is that area codes, as a rule, cover a much larger area than zip codes. Area code 850, for instance - in Tallahassee alone there's at least a half-dozen zip codes. Now, that said, it's possible that lists of ZIP codes on a county-by-county basis could, possibly, be notable enough for inclusion - but articles on invidivual ZIP codes will almost never be notable (with, as mentioned, 10048 being the exception that proves the rule - it's worth noting that there wasn't even an article on 90210...) - The Bushranger One ping only 19:32, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Zip codes of Suffolk County, New York I agree in part with Dream Focus's argument above, but not to the point of separate articles on each and every zip code. Individual zip codes are not in general independently notable, but they are notable as part of a system. A List of zip codes article would therefore be genuinely encyclopedic but very unwieldy. It therefore makes sense to break it up, say by state - except that a List of zip codes of New York State would still be unwieldy. So this article is, I would suggest, on an appropriate scale for such an article, though it could certainly do with improvement. PWilkinson (talk) 23:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment' To clarify, are you saying keep Zip codes of Suffolk County, New York and delete the rest? - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 23:26, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Basically, yes - though I note that many of the others seem to be in Georgia, and I would have no objection, if anyone is inclined to do so, to seeing them merged into a similar article (though if it didn't cover the whole state, I'd want to see some kind of geographical rationale). PWilkinson (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keeping the Suffolk County page would be fine with me. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:55, 18 October 2011 (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.