Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project for Public Spaces

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 keep. (non-admin closure) —MRD2014 ^{Talk • Edits • Help!} 02:33, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Project for Public Spaces (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

non-notable CelenaSkaggs (talk) 16:10, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:32, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:32, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I see a lot of sources in gnews. LibStar (talk) 02:19, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: The "Town and Country Planning" article that I added as a reference says this organisation "enjoys an international reputation for its work on the design and management of public space". There is also a discussion in a book on "Urban Open Space" and other coverage (via Highbeam) includes from Buffalo [1], Orlando [2], Pittsburgh [3], Milwaukee [4]. I think there is enough overall for WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 08:10, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Massive amount of WP:SIGCOV over many years in the local paper, search here: [5],) but even if it is the local paper, the New York Times is a WP:RS. Just needs a better article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, I'll be serious now, this is a notable city planning organization that has had an ongoing impact on NYC over the course of several decades, plus it publishes widely cited books and reports on issues in city planning, and the projects it has implemented in New York are widely cited as models useful in design of other cities. Note that this is a good-faith nomination by an editor who seems to have failed to run a proper WP:BEFORE search, in Nom's defense, article is poorly sourced and far too brief. Had we but editors enough, and time.....E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:56, 24 September 2017 (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.