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.
Soft Delete Amazing how hard it is to find articles on a 90 year old organisation! I think this could be saved by someone who knows the field?
Neonchameleon (
talk)
01:16, 9 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep Seems to be a notable organization, and if a major print encyclopedia has an article on it, I agree Wikipedia should. I did some editing
[1] and got rid of things like "and as funny as it is –as I write this paper for a college class". The article's creator wrote about himself and how he felt about things, instead of keeping it strictly encyclopedic.
DreamFocus09:59, 10 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep I did some substantial rewriting to eliminate the personal essay portion. WP as a matter of principle has always from the first included everything with an article in major general encyclopedias. Inclusion in such works is a secure standard of notability: the established experts at traditional encyclopedic notability have judged them notable, and the articles in them are reliable tertiary sources. We include a lot more also, of course, but their coverage is the starting point for ours. DGG (
talk )
03:33, 11 March 2014 (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.
Soft Delete Amazing how hard it is to find articles on a 90 year old organisation! I think this could be saved by someone who knows the field?
Neonchameleon (
talk)
01:16, 9 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep Seems to be a notable organization, and if a major print encyclopedia has an article on it, I agree Wikipedia should. I did some editing
[1] and got rid of things like "and as funny as it is –as I write this paper for a college class". The article's creator wrote about himself and how he felt about things, instead of keeping it strictly encyclopedic.
DreamFocus09:59, 10 March 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep I did some substantial rewriting to eliminate the personal essay portion. WP as a matter of principle has always from the first included everything with an article in major general encyclopedias. Inclusion in such works is a secure standard of notability: the established experts at traditional encyclopedic notability have judged them notable, and the articles in them are reliable tertiary sources. We include a lot more also, of course, but their coverage is the starting point for ours. DGG (
talk )
03:33, 11 March 2014 (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.