Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melbourne Chess Club

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Melbourne Chess Club

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

I am concerned that this club is not sufficiently notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. The only claim to notability is its age and I'm not sure that that is sufficiently notability on its own right for an article. Does this page meet the standards of WP:ORG or should it be removed? FrozenPurpleCube 02:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete as it fails WP:ORG. Wikipedia isn't a clubs directory. GreenJoe 02:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep because Wikipedia is not paper. I think being the oldest chess club in Australia, and one of the oldest active ones in the world, is a claim to notability. YechielMan 04:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, part of the problem is that's not supported by any other sources that I could find. Perhaps that can be fixed, and I'm not really worried about it on its own. (Though besides the 1886 number on their website, I found dates going back to 1851, so who knows what is accurate??) The primary issue I have is that that doesn't really make for notability on its own right. While Wikipedia isn't paper, it's also not the Book of Every Record in the Whole World. Besides its age and owning a building, what *else* can anyone say about it? You'd think there'd be more coverage of it if it's had over a hundred years to be important. If not, maybe just mentioning in Australian Chess Federation would be appropriate. (That article is sadly lacking in content). FrozenPurpleCube 04:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not unlimited bandwidth or server space. GreenJoe 05:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment A recent discussion that may or may not be relevant is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Box Hill Chess Club, about another chess club in the same city. There the claim for notability was as the largest, this one is the oldest.-- Mattinbgn/ talk 05:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete No secondary sources, therefore not notable under WP:NOTE. Some reliable secondary sources needed. Assize 11:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as per Assize. Just because an organisaion is very old does not make them notable, unless secondary sources are found showing they are being recognised outside of themselves. Davewild 19:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Google News Archive does come up with sources mainly from 2006. [1]. No verification for 1886 claim. Capitalistroadster 03:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
As far as I can tell none of those articles are about the chess club though. Passing mention doesn't establish notability. Even when it's hosting a chess tournament. FrozenPurpleCube 04:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, but change my opinion to "Keep" if a reliable secondary source can be found to assert that it's the oldest chess club in Australia. If verified, that would make it notable, to my mind. Lankiveil 08:01, 31 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.