Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swanston estates

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. Good research by SharkxFanSJ; the consensus doesn't seem to be to keep, though. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Swanston estates

Likely non-notable neighbourhood. Samuel Tan 05:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Week Keep - the neighborhood is recognized by the City of Sacramento and is mentioned in Sacramento, California. I've gone ahead and cleaned it up into a respectable stub article. There are other neighborhoods in the city that have well-developed articles, and this has the same potential.--SharkxFanSJ (talk) 09:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No assertion of importance or significance. Even after being cleaned up, the article consists of a description of the boundaries, mentions that is behind a mall, gives the name of the elementary school located there, and the zip code. Drawn Some (talk) 20:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Neighborhoods (or zipcodes, for that matter) are not inherently notable.The "courtesy notability" given to villages does not includeu every developer's tract in a city. Is there any evidence it satisfies [[WP:N}}?Edison (talk) 03:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A cursory search of Google News reveals:

This neighborhood is politically active. Its residents have formed not only a neighborhood association, but also a political action group called Swanson Estates Against Crime. The PAC has offered endorsements for candiates for local office and weighed in on other local issues.
The neighborhood is also mentioned, by name, regularly in the police blotter.
The local paper, the Sacramento Bee, seems to mention this area faily often without need to define it to its readers.

As I mentioned above, the Sacramento City Government has recognized this as an official neighborhood in their city, including the borders laid out in the article. Per Wikipedia:Notability (populated places), neighborhoods are normally excluded as non-notable because of a lack of multiple reliable sources, lack of official recognition, unofficial boundaries, and the fact that some neighborhoods are simply creations of those that live there. None of those appear to be issues here.--SharkxFanSJ (talk) 05:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, I know that Wikipedia:Notability (populated places) is only a proposed policy, but my points also speak to the WP:N.--SharkxFanSJ (talk) 06:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this place has gotten third party coverage enough that we can write about its history, politics, concerns, etc. I cited one article with some history, there are many more in the 1990s, especially about clashes between the neighborhood and city officials over traffic issues, the subject of many full-length articles. --Chiliad22 (talk) 14:20, 6 May 2009 (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.