Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Box Hill Chess Club

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. PeaceNT 02:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Box Hill Chess Club

Box Hill Chess Club (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

They fail WP:ORG and the article fails to cite sources. They are not notable. Delete GreenJoe 15:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• Weak delete Being the largest chess club in Australia, if that's true, is significant. However, the nominator's arguments stand up to scrutiny. YechielMan 16:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as there are no sources, and even if they were shown to be the largest Chess club in Australia, I'd like some qualification to that. If they really only have 160 members, I'm sorry, that's not significant. It'd have to be a bit higher, or have more of a meaningful impact on Chess in Australia and the world. FrozenPurpleCube 17:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep as user has history of bad faith noms -- claim of largest asserts notability, but needs reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 17:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC) Delete per concerns by User:FrozenPurpleCube, below. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 17:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

The problem is, there are no reliable sources for that claim, and according to their website, they have 160 members. I'm sorry, but even if they are the largest, at that size, it's not significant. In any case, accusing someone of a history of bad faith nominations is ill-advised, unless you can argue some particular bad faith here. Which I simply don't see. FrozenPurpleCube 17:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

My bad; I was a bit hasty. A quick Google search fails to find anything but Wikipedia mirrors as far as the "largest" claim goes. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 17:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Mattinbgn/ ^talk 21:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
• Comment, Its not short of Google News Archive results (none of which are free). Also coverage on SBS Radio: [1]. John Vandenberg 23:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

From what I can tell, which admittedly, isn't the whole article, none of those are actually about the club itself. Some of the examples are just calendar events (and thus not actual coverage of anything any more than my local swim club's meets being in the paper), others are just trivial mentions in articles that are primarily about another subject, rather than the club itself. In effect, it's like having a profile of a major celebrity to justify his elementary school having an article. FrozenPurpleCube 02:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete absent further sourcing. -- Visviva 23:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete. Most of the Google News Archive results are for tournaments at the club. We need some sources indicating notability in the world of chess to warrant a keep. Capitalistroadster 02:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. The main thing which would make a chess club notable are achievements, such as winning the national team championships, and I see no evidence of that here. Membership numbers can fluctuate greatly from year to year, and is a too flighty measure for judging notabililty. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC
• STRONG KEEP: This is an important article that can be expanded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam360 (talk • contribs)

I don't see why this is an important article. What about this subject is important and how can it be expanded beyond the trivial? FrozenPurpleCube 21:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Note: Above comment is from creator of article, who has also created a series of articles on "eisteddfod"s without bothering to explain what an eisteddfod is. I marked those articles for speedy deletion. JuJube 18:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• Weak delete - no sources at present; however, if the notability of being the largest chess club in Australia can be verified, I would be happy to support keeping the article. JRG 23:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, with same proviso as JRG above. Lankiveil 23:42, 25 May 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.