Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Associated Student Government

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. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Associated Student Government

Associated Student Government (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This is merely a university student body and the only sources are the organisation itself. There is no evidence of notability and its author appears to have a coi. B1atv 16:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• Strong delete. First, the original editor, User:CarsonG, has direct contact with the president of ASG. Note the source information at Image:Asgpresreagan.jpg. WP:COI is in play here. Second, the article is overly deep and relies upon primary sources; no independent sources are cited in the article itself. Finally, I don't see anything in the article that shows the organization as notable outside of TSU-San Marcos. As for the disposition of the article, I do not see the need for this to stand as an article or as a redirect. I think the content could be condensed into two or three paragraphs and included into Texas State University-San Marcos, but I do not see the need for a redirect to remain. —

C.Fred (talk) 17:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

COI editing often involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote yourself or the interests of other individuals, companies, or groups. When an editor disregards the aims of Wikipedia to advance outside interests, they stand in a conflict.

I do know the president of ASG and I do not believe I have a conflict of interest. Even if I did do you believe after reading the article that I have been bias by citing primary source material indicating the exact rights, duites, and powers of the branches of government? If anything I feel this would completely vindicate the position (which is to not have one at all) of objectivity. Only information, no opinions. According to the COI page a conflict of interest exists when an 'editor disregards the aims of Wikipedia to advance outside interests....' If that is the reason you have indicted me then I challenge you to show a single instance of my as an editor advancing an outside interest. My only interest is information and in it being available which from what I understand is Wikipedia's goal as well.

Also, I was not aware of that fact that ASG being pertinent to only San Marcos, Austin, and San Antonio is not enough in the eyes of Wikipedia to warrant an article. There are over 28,000 students that attend Texas State University and I simply thought that the students would appreciate access to informaiton about the government that spends their money.

Exactly how do you come to the conclusion that because the source is Asgpresreagan.jpg that I have a COI of with the president of ASG? The name of the file is the name and position of the person holding the title currently. Your logic seems to be unreasonably flawed here.

Having ASG listed did not seem like a bad idea at all but after my battles with editors here it seems that there is essentially no chance of saving this article from deletion. Becauce the fight to provide more unbiased information to people about things that effect them will obviously be unsuccessful please go ahead and delete the article.

--CarsonG 17:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Revision. Also note that in the references section there are over 10 links to outside sources confirming the notability of ASG to the state of Texas and the students they serve all over the country.--CarsonG 17:48, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Not all of those ten links are external sources, and some of them do not establish notability, e.g. the article that talks about the University putting up a statue of LBJ but only peripherally, in one paragraph, talks about ASG. —C.Fred (talk) 21:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

You mention "those ten" sources and that some of them are not external. First, there were more than 10 links. Second, which link is an internal link? Which link or links connect to asg.txstate.edu? For that matter I challenge you to point out a link I listed that points to *.txstate.edu at all. Please clarify your statements and cite your assertions with evidence so that I might have a fair chance to reply.

Also your evidence (the LBJ article) that none of the links listed establish notability I believe is absurd. The admin that made the original request simply asked for 3 outside sources talking about ASG and I assume I was also supposed to demonstrate why ASG is notable, as in what have they done to warrant recognition? Out of the 11 or so listed at least a few, including the tuition article, student services fee, and name change are changes that effected not only ALL 28,000 students of the campus, but also the entire staff and faculty. All together we are talking about over 50,000 people. Not to mention all of the kids all over the nation who might recognize Texas State over Southwest Texas.--CarsonG 00:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, no more notable than any other university student government. (If the result is to keep, the title needs a disambiguation page, as the name is identical to that of student governments at other universities and colleges. Western Kentucky University comes to mind, mainly 'cuz it's my alma mater.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

That is like saying the United States government is no different from any other government therefore the United States Wiki entry should be deleted. A disambiguation page is certainly needed. I never meant to monopolize the article for Associated Student Government. In fact I heartily welcome any other school in the world to include their student government in this article. Student governments are extremely important and deserve to be recognized. To say it is no more notable than any other student government is tantamount to saying Ralkyhick is no more notable than any other person on Wikipedia therefore we should delete him from Wikipedia or that Texas State University, the University of Texas, the University of Maryland, etc etc are not notable compared to each other and so they do not deserve Wiki entries. Sorry Realkyhick but your logic is fatally flawed and will lead to bad administration on Wiki.--CarsonG 18:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• Keep We keep the page for the main student government/student body organisation of major universities, and I think Texas State -San Marcos counts. The title needs to be changed of course. So I changed it to Associated Student Government (Texas State-San Marcos). For the record, we do not have a article about Reakyhick--a user page is something else altogether. But the argument is correct that in the sense that we should have pages for all of this particular group of subjects. they're important in the university. What we shouldn't have is pages on individual students clubs and the like, and pages such a this are the place to put such information. DGG (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

To me this seems like a very logical and fair way to set up the entry and I hope your point of view wins out.--CarsonG 19:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• Can you provide an example of a university that has an article on its student government? I did a quick check if the two I attended, and neither NC State nor Georgia Tech has one--and editors have been aggressively carving out history and other sections from Tech's main article.

Beyond that, I'm still not convinced that ASG warrants an article. After the blocks of text copied from its bylaws, etc. are removed, I think we're left with four paragraphs of original prose. That can be rolled into the uni's article. —C.Fred (talk) 21:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

On the one hand, I found Category:Student governments in the United States. On the other, I note it's thinly populated, and only Washington University Student Union would be from an institution similar in size to TSU. —C.Fred (talk) 21:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• I do not have ANY idea how you could possibly even attempt to claim that Washington University and Texas State are similar in size. Please brush up on your statistics before you go around talking about things you know nothing about. The Washing University's own website claims no more than 6,000 full-time undergraduet students, while TSU broke an enrollment record this year topping out at 28,132 full-time undergraduate students Texas State breaks fall enrollment record. Texas State also includes another couple of thousand graduate and doctoral students as well. So clearly your assertion is completely unfounded. Is this the level of administration here at Wikipedia? Using misinformation to get an article deleted does not seem to be in the interest of Wikipedia or the people who use it so why use it?--CarsonG 01:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Beyond that, I'm still not convinced that ASG warrants an article. After the blocks of text copied from its bylaws, etc. are removed, I think we're left with four paragraphs of original prose. That can be rolled into the uni's article. - C.Fred

Right now the article is a stub. After all I did just create it two or three days ago and need more time to put everything up. I am not looking to invest 20+ hours in the entry if I know there is a good chance it will be deleted soon. Nonetheless, as mentioned before this article is pretty much still a stub. There is just so much information to list that a few days is not enough time to post everything.

That point aside. Is it not important to make sure the bylaws and constitutions are included in the page(s) since each governments constitution and/or bylaws are different? Not every government is the same or has the same power. For example the student government of TSU is much more powerful than the student government of UTSA (university of Texas San Antonio). Just because this may be the first, or perhaps more properly one of the first student government entries, this is an opportunity to create a rational and logical system that will provide a place for any student government in the world or someone else interested enough to acknowledge the pros and cons of a student government.--CarsonG 00:16, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• I propose rolling ASG-San Marcos into the category:Student governments but I also propose retaining a place in the asg disambiguity article as well as the associated student government article redirected to the general category page for Student governments.

• Also as a response to the assertion that only Washington University Student Union would be an institution similar in size that is present on that list is incorrect. At first glance I saw at least once school that compares well. Arizona State University.--CarsonG 00:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Non-notable schoolcruft. One degree of separation from the Southwest Oologah Vo-tech A&M Baptist Community College Linux Users Group. ➪HiDrNick! 01:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:NOTE. If the organization and its functions are notable, then the article should mention those functions - "The ASG is responsible for a variety of functions on campus, consisting primarily of X, Y, and Z." The specific legislative means and authority for those responsibilities, as shown in bylaws, constitution, etc., is unnecessary - unless those elements of the organization are notable in themselves (i.e. being the first or oldest such constitution). Once those elements are removed, the remainder is one paragraph of "About" and one paragraph under History. The About section should be the lede, and must be revised to present a Neutral POV - the organization's website does not get to write the lede, it must be neutral. The history section, similarly, must also be re-written, and it doesn't really discuss the organization's history, but rather cites an example of the organization's activity. Of the sources, at least half refer to the ASG's site, which isn't an independent source. The other half discuss events and activities unreferenced in the article - those links are nice and all, but nothing in the article says why they demonstrate notability. WP:COI is a serious concern, as noted - and the author's percieved relationship to the organization and its members may comprimise his/her neutrality. I think that this article would be salvageable, but for the notability issue - though I wouldn't mind being proven wrong. Best, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 18:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:N, not every student government is inherently notable. Carlossuarez46 21:46, 2 October 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.