Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neighborhood Parks Council

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. --humblefool® 05:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neighborhood Parks Council

Neighborhood Parks Council (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Looks like some park organization. My question I want to ask, is it notable enough in the sense of an encyclopedia. And if so, we need to cleanup the external link frenzy... and the article. Note, most of the citations come from the organizations own website. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 09:33, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

The Neighborhood Parks Council is environmental organization representative of over 100 parks groups in San Francisco. There are many other environmental organizations listed in Wikipedia, so I don't see how this one is any different. I am new to Wikipedia, so any feedback is welcome. Maybe I'm trying too hard? This unsigned comment was submitted by Wolframald (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) on 09:50, November 12, 2006. Please sign your posts on talk pages!

I live in the San Francisco area (San Jose to be precise) and have never heard of this council. It's suprising, since I see billboards for things such as the BAAQMD daily and have been to many of the parks listed. Golden Gate Park in particular is very notable in my book and to San Franciscans in general, so I'd have to say conditional keep. So long as the article is seriously wikified, I see no problem keeping it, especially if we're talking CSD A7. thadius856_talk 04:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - looks notable to me: [1] shows google presence and it has a physical address and physical phone. JoeSmack ^Talk(p-review!) 04:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Reply - Please consider the following:

The Neighborhood Parks Council is ten years old, and just celebrated its ten year anniversary. The organization is actually a coalition of several hundred park and green open space groups in San Francisco. Isabel Wade, founder of the organization, has been one of the most important green leaders in San Francisco, and is one of the founders of the Friends of the Urban Forest and also the National Aids Memorial Grove located in Golden Gate park. The organization is located at 451 Hayes Street in San Francisco. The phone number is 415.621.3260. With regard to content of the Wikipedia entry, efforts were made to use original language and not to replicate information available elsewhere on the web. Numerous links are now included in the article to other parks and relevant topics that are central to the work of this organization. Yes, the folks who created these entries are Wikipedia newbies and would very much appreciate feedback with regard to style, content, and linkage.

• Keep - The organization's existence is verifiable and it looks notable enough to me. Problems with the article can be fixed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cardamon (talk • contribs) 11:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 19:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

• Reply Please provide suggestions on how to fix/improve problems with the article. Thank you.--Wolframald 14:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The article badly needs references to reliable external sources (i.e. not just the organization's own website) which can verify the information in it. Books and journal articles would be ideal; magazine articles are okay. Government websites, websites of grantgiving foundations, and links to newspaper articles that are expected to remain available for a while are better than nothing. By the way, are you a principal of the Neighborhood Parks Association? Cardamon 22:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

• Reply Thank you for these suggestions. Yes, I am a principle of NPC; my name is Wolfram Alderson, and I am Deputy Director of the Neighborhood Parks Council. One challenge with regard to external citations is that NPC is one of the leading sources of information with regard to neighborhood parks. There are many newspaper articles I can cite, and NPC is listed on the San Francisco Recreation and Parks official government website. I must admit that I am not too knowledgeable about how to create citations in wikipedia, but this is a welcome challenge.--Wolframald 19:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• Reply I have added some of the requested references to external sources. I want to be cautious and not overdo it--the first comment in this discussion seemed to be concerned with the idea that there were too many external links. Again, any feedback in this reqard would be greatly appreciated.

• Keep. The organization isn't of general importance, so I've removed the link in the Park article, but it's important enough within its context, Parks in San Francisco, California. JamesMLane t c 14:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, trialsanderrors 05:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Basically an ad for a local organization. --Aaron 21:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

A local organization with about 22,000 google hits. On checking, it seems that almost all those hits are for the NPC that we are discussing, and not for other organizations. [2] Cardamon 01:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Firstly, I'd just like to say I'm impressed at the response to this AfD: Wikipedia conventions are always convoluted for those unfamiliar with the system, and Wolframald is showing an admirable willingness to address concerns. Secondly, while I don't personally have an opinion on whether this organisation meets the criteria to have an article of its own (though I would say that notability could be established easily enough by the addition of some press citations), if the final consensus is that it does not then I would suggest that at the very least a summary be merged into Parks in San Francisco, California, since this organisation does seem to be of some note in that context. (To avoid unbalancing the latter article, it would need expanding with summaries of the other organisations involved with SF parks; actually, it would rather benefit from that anyway...) — Haeleth Talk 23:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

• Reply Thanks for the nod from the latter contributor that acknowledges that we are trying to create a wikipedia entry of value that meets the standards of the wiki community. The comment from Aaron that states basically an ad and the the comment from JamesMLane that the organization isn't of general importance seem harsh to me. Please explain how our entry about an organization that has dedicated itself to greening the City of San Francisco for the last 10 years is less relevant (or more of an ad) than the entries in Wikipedia for the the 7-11 retail chain, Charmin toilet paper, or the World Toilet Organization? The Neighborhood Parks Council is considered a model for urban efforts to unite neighborhoods around their urban assets. We work tirelessly to bring resources and support to run-down urban parks in underserved neighborhoods. I am truly impressed at the level of democracy involved in the wikipedia community, and I am a willing and eager student with regard to bringing the NPC entry up to standards. Please note that I have added press citations, and can easily add more, but still feel gunshy from the comments that suggested there were too many external links.--Wolframald 01:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps "general importance" was the wrong term. I meant only that the organization isn't important enough, in the context of parks worldwide, to be linked to from the Park article. That article is about parks in general and shouldn't link to every organization anywhere that has anything to do with parks. Please note that I voted to keep the article about NPC, and that I edited it to bring it more in line with Wikipedia style conventions. JamesMLane t c 07:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• Soft Keep The organization seems to exert notability, but I'm never to kean on people pushing any agendas through wikipedia, noble or otherwise. Wolframald is nearly the sole contributor to the article. RichMac (Talk) 04:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Rename to Neighborhood Parks Council (California) or Neighborhood Parks Council (San Francisco), or even Neighborhood Parks Council (San Francisco, California). 38.100.34.2 23:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• ReplyWith regard to reply by RichMac, there are nearly 150 member groups under the Neighborhood Parks Council and 14,000 folks actively on our mailing list, many of whom, I'm sure, would like to contribute to the Neighborhood Parks Council wikipedia entry, but are unlikely to do so while the article is scheduled for deletion. Highlighting me as the "sole contributor," seems diminishing and hardly rewards an earnest effort being made to rise up to the standards of the community. There is a learning curve here, and the sheer element of time involved, so if you seek a diversity of points of view that will strengthen the NPC Wikipedia entry, then simply approve it, so we can move forward with improving upon the article. BTW, my "agenda" is (a) to be passionate about a topic (related to preserving, sustaining, and developing green open space) and (b) creating a wikipedia entry that is worthy and meets the standards of the wikipedia community. There are thousands of entries in Wikipedia that portray much more of conspicuous agendas than this entry being submitted by park/green open space advocates in San Francisco (see Wikipedia entries: Young Republicans, Pro-life, the Revolutionary Communist Party,or the asphalt entry that provides links to the National Asphalt Pavement Association. The Asphalt Institute).--216.102.91.242 14:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

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.