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.
I cannot find substantial coverage of this organization on its own (though it gets plenty of mentions because it offers a certification). Previous AfDs ended no consensus in 2006 (evenly split keep/delete) and delete in 2008; it was remade in 2009. This page is a PROMO disaster.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
05:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep: Pretty notable organization, especially in Anti-Money Laundry and Anti-Terrorist Financing profession. Its certification CFE is the most recognized in the industry. However, I do agree in its current state it doesn't fit with Wikipedia guidelines. So if someone can rewrite this and get rid of the promo content then it's strong keep.
Kazuha1029 (
talk)
06:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep: As Kazuha says, it is pretty notable, even if it does not get much mainstream attention. However, coverage of some of its activities can be found, and I believe they are sufficient to meet
WP:NCORP. For instance,
WWF Collaberation,
anti slavery activities,
acquisition by Becker. Worth noting the coverage of the first two is quite extensive, and either one of them would likely be enough to classify ACAMS as notable.
BilledMammal (
talk)
09:04, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
@
BilledMammal, go ahead and add some of that to the page—it's ready to take more sourced content now (I reverted to the pre-2015 revision with some updated material) and I'm probably about to withdraw the nomination.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
16:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep. It is notable. I started it in 2009 with this version. That got puffed up a bit to this version (e.g. "for-profit" removed from lead description, plug for founders added), then with these changes made in 2015 by
Kourtneymccarty all the sourced content was scrapped and replaced by material from the website. Probably best to go back to the 2009 version, then maybe update it. But it may be hard to stop it deteriorating again.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
12:08, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Aha, Kourtney McCarty appears to have been ACAMS's Director of Marketing (
[1]). Also wow she wiped out a much stronger article with promotional material. I'm probably about to withdraw the nomination and restore the January 2015 sourced revision.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
16:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
I was able to source the founding of the org and a 2007 membership stat to newspaper articles. They got a lot of press in Florida, where the founder lived, in the early years.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
17:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
That looks a lot better. I think you can just close the AfD as withdrawn, since there were no "delete" votes. But some sort of protection would be good.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
20:52, 14 September 2021 (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.
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.
I cannot find substantial coverage of this organization on its own (though it gets plenty of mentions because it offers a certification). Previous AfDs ended no consensus in 2006 (evenly split keep/delete) and delete in 2008; it was remade in 2009. This page is a PROMO disaster.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
05:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep: Pretty notable organization, especially in Anti-Money Laundry and Anti-Terrorist Financing profession. Its certification CFE is the most recognized in the industry. However, I do agree in its current state it doesn't fit with Wikipedia guidelines. So if someone can rewrite this and get rid of the promo content then it's strong keep.
Kazuha1029 (
talk)
06:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep: As Kazuha says, it is pretty notable, even if it does not get much mainstream attention. However, coverage of some of its activities can be found, and I believe they are sufficient to meet
WP:NCORP. For instance,
WWF Collaberation,
anti slavery activities,
acquisition by Becker. Worth noting the coverage of the first two is quite extensive, and either one of them would likely be enough to classify ACAMS as notable.
BilledMammal (
talk)
09:04, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
@
BilledMammal, go ahead and add some of that to the page—it's ready to take more sourced content now (I reverted to the pre-2015 revision with some updated material) and I'm probably about to withdraw the nomination.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
16:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep. It is notable. I started it in 2009 with this version. That got puffed up a bit to this version (e.g. "for-profit" removed from lead description, plug for founders added), then with these changes made in 2015 by
Kourtneymccarty all the sourced content was scrapped and replaced by material from the website. Probably best to go back to the 2009 version, then maybe update it. But it may be hard to stop it deteriorating again.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
12:08, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Aha, Kourtney McCarty appears to have been ACAMS's Director of Marketing (
[1]). Also wow she wiped out a much stronger article with promotional material. I'm probably about to withdraw the nomination and restore the January 2015 sourced revision.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
16:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
I was able to source the founding of the org and a 2007 membership stat to newspaper articles. They got a lot of press in Florida, where the founder lived, in the early years.
Sammi Brie (she/her •
t •
c)
17:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
That looks a lot better. I think you can just close the AfD as withdrawn, since there were no "delete" votes. But some sort of protection would be good.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
20:52, 14 September 2021 (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.