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 speedy keep. Per WP:SKCRIT#1, nominator proposed merge, and no other editor suggested delete or redirect. (non-admin closure) wumbolo ^^^ 11:32, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March for Our Lives Portland (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)

Limited notability outside of parent article March for Our Lives Springee (talk) 23:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect This article has little original, non-trivial content. Of the four sections, one is the introduction, one is background which covers information that is part of the primary topic. The organization section is almost completely trivial information or information covered in the final section of the article. The final section again has mostly trivial details. The material of note in the article could be condensed to a single paragraph and covered in the parent article where more readers are likely to find it. A second child article, March for Our Lives Albany was redirected and merged for reasons similar to the issues here. [[1]] Springee (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 April 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:26, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per WP:GNG (disclaimer: article creator). Note consensus not to merge on the article's talk page. This article is similar to articles about other notable local events, such as as March for Science Portland and Women's March on Portland (the former of which is a Good article, I might add). What nominator deems "trivial" is the base for many similar protest articles -- background, mission, organizers, planning, event description, participants, impact, commentary/coverage. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:19, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, many sources in article, notable event; Portland is a major city. My sense is the nominator (who apparently thinks it should be deleted by putting this article up for AfD) should not be allowed to vote above (and then the vote is merge?).--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:59, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 02:39, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 02:39, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• without vote, but with mentioning WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. --Ｔｏｍ (talk) 08:01, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep - The submitter wants it to be a merge. While I'm all for AfD ending up in merge as a commentator agreement, that isn't its purpose - there is a plan for controversial merges, surely having a look at WP:PM makes more sense. If the local consensus has already opted against merge, I suppose you could opt for delete if you think it fails without it, but re-doing merge this way risks WP:FORUMSHOP Nosebagbear (talk) 09:24, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I want aware of that option. Should we close this now and restart the discussion that way?Springee (talk) 10:26, 19 April 2018 (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.