Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raytown Police Department

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. → Call me Hahc21 19:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Raytown Police Department[edit]

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

Small city (30,000 population) police dept. No possible notability . No non local reliable sources. DGG ( talk ) 06:57, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 16:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 16:17, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 17:31, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. The source "Raytown Police Department: The First 60 Years (1950-2010), by Ret. Sgt. Bruce T. Varner, (2011)" seems to be significant. Yes it is local, and to be used with care, but it sounds like legitimate documentation, and there are other sources used, too. --do ncr am 17:43, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

giventhe authorship, I doubt it is independent. It seems to be privately printed, and is in a total of two libraries. DGG ( talk ) 21:04, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Raytown is a major suburb of Kansas City, Missouri. Not the biggest, but lots of business there. LionMans Account (talk) 03:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice article with decent sources, but how is it notable outside of Raytown? Why isn't merging appropriate? 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 16:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested, without prejudice to later re-creation. Bearian (talk) 20:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A small city has a police department. I assume that they also have a fire department, an ambulance service, waterworks, a road department, sanitation, etc., etc. *To their credit*, this PD seems to have generated no substantial, independent coverage at all from any reliable source. It's like a well-done genealogy of a nice family with no notable members, and I am unwilling to expand our scope to this degree. I would agree with merge, but I don't see anything worth transferring over, and redirect unnecessary. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 00:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as, oh, i don't even know what to call it. Police-cruft? Pictures of the shoulder insignia? Such scintillating text as, The elected marshal of the City of Raytown is responsible for the operation of the RPD? Perhaps we could find out if the marshal has a dog, and if so, what breed (reliably sourced, of course)? I know I'm supposed to keep my arguments to wiki-policy, but this stuff is just absurd. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy to User:Btvarner/Raytown Police Department and then delete the article. The level of work that has been put into this article is admirable, but the Raytown PD isn't notable enough. Dralwi k|^{Have a Chat} 17:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non notable Secret ^account 19:30, 14 March 2014 (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.