Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oak Grove Fire Department

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 to delete, indication of a consensus to merge if anyone wants to pursue that. W.marsh 23:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oak Grove Fire Department[edit]

Oak Grove Fire Department (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Contested speedy. I appreciate the project is trying to improve the coverage of fire services in Wikipedia. However, going as far as introducing non notable local depts and listing individual staff seems, to me, to be going being what is encyclopaedic into what should be dedicated works Nuttah68 17:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Oak Grove Fire Department is part of WikiProject Fire Service, which is building a comprehensive and detailed guide to the fire service around the world. As it is part of a global WikiProject this article should not be deleted. Recommend to keep article. Additionally, it is considered common courtesy to inform the author of an article when their article has been marked for deletion. This was not done by the requestor but I have now informed the author. --Drew30319 18:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I am one of the primary editor/members of WikiProject Fire Service and although I tagged the article as a member of the Project, to be honest I see no value in it. I tagged it because I attempted to tag all fire service related articles, and plan to leave it to others to make them noteworthy. I have tagged a number of articles which I even plan to nominate for deletion or merger. They are tagged as a way to categorize them, not as a way to state their importance to the project. Maybe down the line I will create importance levels, but I have yet to do so. --Daysleeper47 18:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (sadly) per nom.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 18:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into the article on the town it's in. Fire depts are inherently notable, but generally should be part of the community article. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge in a greatly shortened form into the articleOak Grove, Arkansas (population 376). Article: 1,603 words (exclusive of AfD text). I propose Edison's Rule: "The article on the fire department should not have more words than the population of the town it protects." (With the correlary,: "It may be considerable shorter.") With the very highest respect for all firemen. Edison 20:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment This is not in Oak Grove, Arkansas, If you read both articles there are highlighted maps that locate them. Also a town of 376 could not justify 3 stations. Dimitrii 18:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. All towns are notable regardless of their size - and as a municipal function, there's no reason to keep Fire departments of said communities. (And "Edison's Rule" sounds arbitrary and silly - Wikipedia is not paper, so why would we set limits on the length of any article??)Highfructosecornsyrup 22:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as this department is certainly non-notable. I appreciate the goals of the WikiProject, but if this is the product I strongly urge reconsideration of how to go about meeting those goals within existing Wikipedia guidelines. Wikipedia is not a collection of miscellaneous information. --Dhartung | Talk 23:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment WP:NOT Does not state "Wikipedia is not a collection of miscellaneous information" but rather "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information." There is an important distinction between the two and obviously it is a miscellaneous collection of information. They key distinction is indiscriminate and if you look through the list of how Wiki currently defines this you'll note that this does not apply to this article. It is not a: (1)List of FAQs, (2)Travel Guide, (3)Memorial, (4)Instruction Manual, (5)Internet Guide, (6)Textbook/annotated text, (7)Plot summary. Drew30319 22:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Pulaski County, Arkansas or another more appropriate locality article per WP:LOCAL, these locality articles could use some more content. JYolkowski // talk 00:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per Edison. Every town has one, and nearly all are less notable than the town it protects. This town has a population of 376. Ohconfucius 08:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge highly edited parts into Pulaski County, Arkansas. Not notable by itself but of use to the county article. Dimitrii 18:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I am the author of this page. This page is NOT about the town "Oak Grove" with a population of 376. If the "editors" would do more research they would know this. The town they are referring to is in northern Arkansas. The Oak Grove Fire Department referenced in this article is located in central Arkansas, in Pulaski County. I believe this article is a fair and true representation of the Department as a whole, as I am a member of it. As for it's notewortyness, who is the judge of that. I beleve it is noteworthy to those who are affected by it, which is more than 4,000 (not 376). Also, it is a good information article for other small fire departments that may have some questions about how to structure themselves. On a free encyclopedia how can anyone suggest deletion of an article that is both founded in fact, and written neutrally? I believe this is an abuse of deletion abilities. If the creators of Wiki were so concerned about every article being of particular interest to everyone in the world it would stand to reason to accept all (rule-abiding) articles they could get. I certainly have no interest in an article about the Pickwick Lake Dam, however I venture to guess that those persons in that area do. Therefore I wouldn't suggest deletion of that article just because I do not have a personal interest in it. Please realize that this is not a print resource, and as such it's resources, while finite, are large enough to preclude this type of wanton disregard for smaller towns in not-so-popular states. I urge you to remove this deletion tag and keep this article. I have no problem editing it if that is required. However, please give the people of this Community their due, let this page stay. Thank you. Joe.
  • Delete since there is no mergeable content (sourced, interestingly encyclopedic?), and the fire department is non notable (as most fire departments are, no matter where they are located). Wikipedia is also WP:NOT a how-to guide, and the article has no WP:V sources to indicate the notability of the fire department. Fram 06:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete according to the author of the page--this is a village of 4000 people. No assertion that this fire company is notable in any particular way, & none of Joe's arguments provide any. DGG 05:24, 9 December 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Oak_Grove_Fire_Department&oldid=1138177054"