Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harbinger Community

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 Harbin Hot Springs, California. Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harbinger Community

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

Unnotable and and unverified entity. Herostratus (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC) Herostratus (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We could have just had a redirect to the hot springs article, but here we are thanks to Herostratus and now we can thoroughly debate the matter. How helpful. Delete, redirect to Harbin Hot Springs, California. The community isn't really verifiable and certainly isn't notable, but Harbinger is a name associated with this place so this is a plausible redirect.[1] Fences&Windows 22:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 22:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 22:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 22:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete could not establish notability. Open to possible redirect. OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 23:47, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect unless more sources can be found and added. Otherwise, redirect to Harbin Hot Springs, California and slightly expand the mention there of Harbinger. --MelanieN (talk) 00:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete & Merge - It's difficult to say that the subject of the article meets WP:GNG, but it is part of Harbin Hot Springs as noted above, therefore, delete and merge would be a good option while removing a lot of the unreferenced material and stuff about its occupants alleged belief structure. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:20, 6 January 2011 (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 this page.