Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Somali Student Association
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus. The keep arguments are somewhat weak, but I do not find a consensus to delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Somali Student Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
De prodded. Non notable organization. No sources in the article at all.Sources are from a local newspaper. This is a university student organization. Shadowjams (talk) 09:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or merge needs sources Dr. Blofeld White cat 10:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That doesn't address the point required by deletion policy, which is whether the sources that it needs actually exist in the first place. Uncle G (talk) 12:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 13:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, does not appear to meet WP:ORG. The association is advised to write about itself on its own website. Stifle (talk) 10:39, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The article already has sources. The organization has also been written about in the popular media (e.g. 1, 2, 3), thereby establishing notability & satisfying WP:ORG. Article could use some proof-reading, but otherwise is definitely worth keeping. Middayexpress (talk) 03:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, The PBS article is a U-Wire article, which is a university newspaper newswire reprint. The second link is from the university newspaper, the University of Minnesota Daily, and the third is an incidental reference about an FBI investigation. The third, I might note, doesn't really qualify as a reliable source. And while the university newspaper might also not be a WP:RS, the more relevant point is that a university newspaper should and does report on local intra-university organizations. But none of that means that just anything those news organizations utter meet WP:Notability. Shadowjams (talk) 05:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That's all very well and good, but only one of those sources were used in the article. The others I just came up with after a quick internet search, which, incidentally, turns up about 48,000 hits for a supposedly non-notable organization. That in and of itself makes it highly unlikely that the article in question is not salvageable on the grounds of notability after more sourcing. Middayexpress (talk) 06:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The first 3 links are the organizations own website, and facebook page. The next one's a personal website, and the next is the wikipedia page itself. I'm not going through 48k links (of course many of these are duplicates or non hits), but a brief sampling shows none of the web hits as notable. Google news is much more relevant for this sort of thing, and that's the search I used and have referenced above. Shadowjams (talk) 08:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The point is, three links out of 48,000 hits obviously does not a dearth make. Middayexpress (talk) 08:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The first 3 links are the organizations own website, and facebook page. The next one's a personal website, and the next is the wikipedia page itself. I'm not going through 48k links (of course many of these are duplicates or non hits), but a brief sampling shows none of the web hits as notable. Google news is much more relevant for this sort of thing, and that's the search I used and have referenced above. Shadowjams (talk) 08:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That's all very well and good, but only one of those sources were used in the article. The others I just came up with after a quick internet search, which, incidentally, turns up about 48,000 hits for a supposedly non-notable organization. That in and of itself makes it highly unlikely that the article in question is not salvageable on the grounds of notability after more sourcing. Middayexpress (talk) 06:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, The PBS article is a U-Wire article, which is a university newspaper newswire reprint. The second link is from the university newspaper, the University of Minnesota Daily, and the third is an incidental reference about an FBI investigation. The third, I might note, doesn't really qualify as a reliable source. And while the university newspaper might also not be a WP:RS, the more relevant point is that a university newspaper should and does report on local intra-university organizations. But none of that means that just anything those news organizations utter meet WP:Notability. Shadowjams (talk) 05:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Hi i am the editor of the article, so far there are more 'keep' then delete, i have been trying to make this article better, can anyone help me in this matter, i have done 10+ edits. Thank you.
Diri0010 (talk) 11:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - It's the largest Somali Student organization in the US that makes it notable. I would also add to Midday's sources the following stories:(1,2) related to the org, that could be used in the article. --Scoobycentric (talk) 13:10, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Those links are exactly the same, and it looks to me they're a reprint of a personal website (correct me if I'm wrong). They certainly don't appear to be a WP:RS. Shadowjams (talk) 08:40, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, it is (allegedly?) the largest Somalian student group; that meets notability for me, it also has media coverage...so that's another mark in the wall. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 05:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I have yet to see media coverage outside of the school newspaper. If there is one, provide it here because I've totally missed it. Also, popularity is not a proxy for notability: It is important to note that topic notability on Wikipedia is not necessarily dependent on things like fame, importance, or the popularity of a topic—although those may contribute. WP:N. Shadowjams (talk) 06:57, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - The SSA organization is well notable to most Somalis in the United States and in Europe(this does not constitute notability however). What constitutes its notability i think its the fact that it shows Culture of Somalis and its growth in America. The article is notable in regards to that and to the increasing media coverage,It has 48,000 hits on google its self, unlike for instance when searching "sic clan" on google. If this article is deleted i am sure it will be recreated with in the near future with increasing attention of Somalis in Minnesota and the ties the organization has with those Somalis for instance (//wcco.com/topstories/Somalis.Minnesota.Islamists.2.363938.html). However article needs to be cleaned up. Suggestion to the article creator: make the article more precise, add more resources and most of all Please add this article in the Somali Wikipedia aswell http:so.wikipedia.org, that is if you can write Somali Thank you. Qayre254 (talk) 07:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I am not seeing the coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. The key point being "reliable". University press articles don't establish notability. And the articles on bignews.biz aren't reliable either as binews.biz is a press release publisher. -- Whpq (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2009 (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.