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 to Richfield, Minnesota. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:37, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

History of Richfield, Minnesota (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)

Merge or Delete It completely boggles my mind how this page was created over 10 years ago by the User:Richfieldhistoricalsociety and has been able to remain. This page is blatant promotional/tourism material for a non-notable suburb, per WP:NOTTRAVEL and WP:SPAM. Basic history is covered on the Richfield, Minnesota page, so no need for a separate "history" page. KidAd (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Richfield, Minnesota. Considering this actually has sources I understand how this has lasted so long. Anyway it has nothing on our I believe 5 articles on the history of Dedham, Massachusetts. Any yet people have said I am out of line speaking of "Dedhammania".John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It may be down to 3 articles. I am still amazed we need an article on the history of anything from 2000 to present.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Richfield, Minnesota is the best solution.TH1980 (talk) 05:23, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep article is well sourced and provides unesful (a lot of it) information about the history that isn't included in the main page. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- Merging would unbalance the Richfield, Minnesota page. I would not advocate this treatment for every community of 35,000 people, but in this case it is fully justified. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Richfield, Minnesota, neither of these articles are long enough to the point where a split is justified. Devonian Wombat (talk) 07:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. There is no reason to delete it; I do not find it "blatant promotional/tourism material" (the suburb is hardly a mecca for tourists and I see no appeal to tourism at all in the article). There is no need to merge; this article is perfectly capable of standing on its own. Kablammo (talk) 14:37, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I referenced the page as "blatant promotional material" because it was created by User:Richfieldhistoricalsociety as promotion. KidAd (talk) 20:32, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge. It is basically UNDUE to have a separate page for the history of such a small city. We are a general-purpose encyclopedia, not a repository for local historical chronicle of every small town. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:12, 21 May 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.