Talk:San Francisco Bay Area Renters' Federation

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force.

Litigation copied from: California Housing Accountability Act

@Neutrality @Kevinburke @Elfelix and anyone else:

I took the entire section from California_Housing_Accountability_Act#Litigation_involving_the_HAA and copy/pasted it into the San Francisco Bay Area Renters' Federation article, and then removed the lawsuits that are not done by SFBARF.

Questions for everyone: 1) Is it generally acceptable in Wikipedia (is there a policy) about having two rather identical sections of articles?

(It doesn't seem appropriate in this case to break the duplicated material into its own article.)

In this case, I feel that it is beneficial to have the info in both places, because it is easily findable, and pertinent to both subjects. The only problems I see are that if someone updates info in one article, they may not update it in the other (any database style "triggers" in Wikipedia? probably not.) but this may not be much of a problem because most of these summaries of cases seem "mature" to me, other than the one still pending.

Thoughts? ---- Avatar317 (talk) 21:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)Avatar317[reply]

This is fine, but Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (usually in the edit summary). Neutrality^talk 21:45, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Defunct?

Looking at their website, it appears pretty likely to me that BARF is defunct. (I believe their social media accounts have also been inactive for a while now.) Thus, I think it's time to reflect that (e.g. changing instances of "is" to "was") so that readers receive accurate information.

(To be clear, I do not support deleting the article or merging it into another article. I believe (as of now) that BARF is sufficiently noteable even if it was shortlived and de facto succeeded by other organizations, and deserves its own article.) ROADKILL (talk) 03:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]