Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rolling Wood at Flower Hill

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 01:52, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rolling Wood at Flower Hill

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

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

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

It's a neighborhood that fails WP:GEOFEAT and WP:GNG. No historic, social, economic, or architectural importance established. A WP:BEFORE check found no significant coverage. Schazjmd (talk) 20:36, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Schazjmd (talk) 20:36, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Loucks was one of the key figures in Rolling Wood's development. Loucks (along with his father) were major realtors and developers on Long Island during this time, and did work in places like Brookville New York, Syosset, New York, and Roslyn Estates, New York.
Please keep in mind that this article is very new. It was started roughly 24 hours ago (as of the time I am posting this). I am expanding it and will continue to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LINYPerson615 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The land that this subdivision sits on was once owned by Edmund A. Guggenheim. He was a prominent copper executive in a prominent family that earned their fortune through the mining industry; the family was a rival of the Rockefeller family, financially. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LINYperson615 (talk • contribs)
Delete all—they're not notable. (I've added two other articles to this nomination that are substantially the same as this one.) Imzadi 1979 → 22:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Flower Hill Estates is VERY notable. One of the most significant developers on Long Island constructed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LINYperson615 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I don't know why I didn't think of doing it the first time - but I just merged the information in all 3 articles with the main article on the village; I think that it perhaps makes more sense (plus everything would be much more organized that way). I agree, and I apologize for my rather harsh tone and my stubbornness. Please delete these articles, as they are obsolete (and because the data has been moved). — Preceding unsigned comment added by LINYperson615 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, you didn't merge them, as the content from the individual articles wasn't added to the main article; you just listed them as "notable subdivisions". Did you notice that several subdivisions are already mentioned in prose, in the Flower_Hill,_New_York#Post-WWII_years_and_suburbanization_(mid-to-late_20th_Century) section? That would be the place to capture any important information about the various developments. Schazjmd (talk) 23:33, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, you've moved content now too. Schazjmd (talk) 23:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Subdivisions are virtually never notable and this is no exception. Reywas92^Talk 19:03, 6 November 2020 (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.