Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Community development planning

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 no consensus (WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Community development planning

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has one source, but the term 'community development' and 'urban planning' are at times synonymous professional practices. As it is I propose this one be deleted and redirected to urban planning. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 16:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:19, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. ^{cinco de}L3X1 ◊distænt write◊ 16:42, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep From a perusal of GBooks and GScholar sources, e.g., The Routledge Handbook of Community Development and Development Planning Concepts and Tools for Planners, Managers and Facilitators, community development planning is a real topic with plenty of sourcing to meet notability per WP:GNG. It might refer to the development of communities or, in the sense used in the article and the Routledge book, community stakeholder engagement in the development process. While there is overlap, it doesn't seem synonymous with urban planning, as such projects could be very local or rural in scope. A notable topic that looks different than urban planning suggests keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 10:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Rutledge book does not define community development planning in fact it references it 3 times within the text but doesn't even address: what IT is?. For that matter the terms community development and urban/city/urban and regional planning are synonymous in the United States because they employ the same professionals and generally share the same concepts. In general, an urban planner (which is not specific to urban settings they also plan in rural, regional or other settings) does community development. They do so through public engagement, this confusion is part and parcel why a nomination for deletion should exist. With respect to this nomination, it could also be merged with the article Theories of urban planning. As it today it's very stub like. By the way, Reidar Dale is Associate Professor of Urban Planning and Management at the Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok and is probably not the only authority on this subject. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 15:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:26, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Even the (sole) source provided in the text uses another term: "Local Government Planning". The subject is typical of phrases and expressions we use quite often; then, some people start to think the expressions possess Wikinotability. At best, redirect this to "urban planning" or something similar. -The Gnome (talk) 13:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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 the work appearing this page.