Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese American Food Society

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 Keep. PeaceNT 16:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese American Food Society

Chinese American Food Society (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Contested CSD, appears to be possibly notable, wider consensus sought. If refs can be found, I'd support Keep. AKRadecki 03:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Weak Delete - It's been several months, plenty of time to find sources.--0rrAvenger 03:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, No non-trivial external coverage. Just another academic association. Google News archive search only showed 2 hits, neither was actual discussion. Incidentally an organisation by the name of 華美食品學會 which I suspect is the same thing gets a few mentions in Chinese academic journals, but unfortunately I don't think it's enough to support an article on them. cab 07:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non Notable and not adiquitally sourced. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 12:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This is an organization founded by Chinese-born Americans who are involved in food science and technology. It was founded in 1974 and is a legitimate organization. Chris 12:22, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm sure those things are true, but what elements of WP:ORG do you assert this article fulfills? No sources, no references, and no reason to find this organization notable. Only 130 G-hits, and the first several are this outfit's website, this article and various Wiki mirrors.  RGTraynor  13:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Additional information and sources have been found and posted in their activites that they have done (2004 conference in Beijing) and that they will be doing (2007 conference in Chicago, Illinois in late July). This should help in this source. Chris 13:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Comment More information has been found on what CAFS does. They are a part of the community and should be kept. They are a relevant society in food technology, especially in the growth of Asian culture and the Asian food market. Equally, they are important in Sino-American trade relationships with ther symposia and professional activities. Chris 14:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep This is sort a sub-scientific society. I think many organizations of this type are not notable or worthy of an article. This society may be an exception. It is a large, active and highly organized sub-society of a very large society. ike9898 00:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep. I do not agree with argument like "Just another academic association." There isn't an academic association about which this could not be said. I think that academic societies are to be judged on the notability of the work they do, and this seems to be just barely enough. I think most similar ones might also be at least borderline notable, because the groups typically do hold a convention and publishing something. DGG 02:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep. It has 388 Google hits, including being mentioned on University websites and by other academic societies. The society has apparently a long history and is mentioned as doing things like giving scholarships, publishing series of monographs, holding joint conferences, etc. People seeing it mentioned might want to look it up on Wikipedia and find out about it. Perhaps barely notable enough for inclusion. --Coppertwig 00:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per the commenters directly above, a rough exception to the rule. Yamaguchi先生 07:29, 28 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.