Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AAPLAC

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 delete. — Nearly Headless Nick 11:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AAPLAC

AAPLAC (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Deleted prod. Reason given was: Non-notable association, no third party independant references given. Reason appears totally valid to me. WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 01:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - fails WP:ORG. MER-C 05:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as original prodder per the reason bolded above - my opinion hasn't changed. Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 12:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep If I read WP:ORG, correctly , the first line reads, Organizations are usually notable if the scope of activities are national or international in scale. It fails in not having a verifiable third party citation which should be easy to find. Here's one that a bullet about the 14th annual conference held in 2003 in San Antonio, TX coming from the University of Conn., Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies. No affliation either location. Recommend cleanup, wikify, etal.

Comment - Please see the new suggested page after a little cleanup. Ronbo76 00:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - The article has been around for about a month and is not a verifiable, encyclopedic article about the topic. A prod to improve the article was met with deletion of the prod rather than improvement of the article. This was not corrected by anyone with an interest in improving the article, which tells me that there is not enough interest in improving the article. Also, the article is headed in the wrong direction since the one reference cited in the article is misleading as it does not support the text to which it is linked. Further, Wikipedia:Notability requirement requires that there exists enough source material to write a verifiable, encyclopedic article about the topic. My own search revealed that there does not exist enough source material to write a verifiable, encyclopedic article about AAPLAC. For these reasons and those set out in the nomination, the appropriate action in the case is to delete. -- Jreferee 04:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Eli Falk 21:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Jreferee. Fails WP:CORP. Ohconfucius 05:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

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.