Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human Resources (gallery)

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 merge. I see no consensus to delete

Human Resources (gallery) is redirected rather than deleted. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Human Resources (gallery)

)

)

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

Local gallery/event space lacks significant coverage in reliable sources, fails notability per

WP:GNG. Vrac (talk) 04:51, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 06:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 06:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 06:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this article was created a month after
another article covering the same thing was written. I've merged that content so I'd recommend deleting it or making it a redirect. If an admin wants to do a history merge that'd be fine, too. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:05, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Changing to Keep because of Oiyarbepsy changing the target of this AfD. The subject passes
WP:GNG, based on the citations already present. I'll be improving it today. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Note I added
Human Resources (Non-Profit) to this nomination, since all the same reasons for deletion apply. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

I will wait for Chris's improvements before making my vote, but I will quote what I stated earlier at Talk:Human Resources (gallery): "I would bet that I could find a place similar to this in any city with a population over 100,000, and many smaller cities as well. The question is, what would make someone outside of Los Angeles care about this? That's the question you need to answer" Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:38, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Place your !vote as you will. I caution you to stick to

policy rather than tell me what you think I have to do. Articles don't have to have regional, statewide, nationwide, or global interest. Chris Troutman (talk) 03:33, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete gallery and Keep non-profit: Procedurally I'm not sure exactly how to handle the addition of the (non-profit) article to the AFD; my original delete nomination of the (gallery) article still stands but it seems to me that Mr. Troutman has improved the (non-profit) article enough for that article to pass
WP:GNG. Vrac (talk) 14:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Vrac, that would be that the gallery page should become a redirect to the non-profit page. There are a whole lot of reasons why the gallery page shouldn't be deleted if we keep the non-profit page. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the (non-profit) article and convert the (gallery) article to a redirect. Thanks to Chris's improvements to the (non-profit) article, I think we are getting close to consensus that it is a keep. That means that we can't delete the (gallery) article, because content was merged from there in (this edit) and we need to preserve the history. However, I would suggest that the final title of the (non-profit) article be changed, and maybe the title of the redirect also. Nobody is going to type the titles with parentheses, but they will show up in the regular search box as article titles. We should disambiguate the titles further to indicate that they are not a gallery of pictures of people (human resources), or an article about human resource policies at NPOs. It's the name of an art space. So I would suggest something like "Human Resources (art space)" or "Human Resources (non-profit art space)". – Margin1522 (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify I am not opposed to a redirect. My delete vote/nomination was to get rid of the (gallery) article as it stood; that has been achieved with the redirect/merge to (non-profit). Vrac (talk) 20:44, 15 January 2015 (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.