Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minnesota State College Student Association

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. Wizardman 17:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Minnesota State College Student Association

Minnesota State College Student Association (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Local student organization. No WP:Reliable Sources. No assertion of WP:Notability. RedShiftPA (talk) 17:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment Please cite the guideline which states that it is inherently notable simply for existing. --Dhartung | Talk 21:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment "This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it.". - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 03:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep: Not inherently notable, but a few reliable sources do exist.—Noetic Sage 18:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - only trivial coverage.--Michael WhiteT·C 21:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, WP:ORG wants the activities of the org to be national in scope. The sources provided are clearly local, and trivial to boot. Paddy Simcox (talk) 23:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete I'd prefer to merge it, but there's no parent organization to merge to. Lovelac7 03:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep: the news results presented above are good enough to satisfy WP:N. Oren0 (talk) 18:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep The "local" applies to local branches of an organisation, which are almost always non-notable. This particular article is about a statewide agency, transcending any particular college, and is a suitable place to put paragraphs about the parts in the indiviual colleges, instead of trying to write articles about each of them. A good compromise. DGG (talk) 01:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Needs to beef up source list. Otherwise it's a marginally notable subject. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 17:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - lack of media coverage. PhilKnight (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - fails WP:ORG due to total lack of independent sources. The article includes no assertion of notability and none has been produced despite a long AFD. BlueValour (talk) 04:39, 23 March 2008 (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.