Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Studio Four (2nd nomination)

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 wasDelete as the previous AfD closed as no consensus leaning towards merge, this one clearly shows that the issue of sources hasnt been address and unsourced material cant be merged into another article. Gnangarra 04:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Studio Four

Studio Four (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

The subject of this article is a university comedy club based at the University of New South Wales. No external sources are used, other than it's own website, to assert it's activities and history (no newspaper articles, reviews etc). A similar club (a theatrical society) at the same university was previously deleted (see New South Wales University Theatrical Society (AFD). The page is seemingly a storage for a vain list of past shows and events with an extensive history, including directors and producers. Delete Jaykatz 06:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 08:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
• Merge to University of New South Wales :: maelgwn :: talk 08:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete until reliable secondary sources provided. Has apparently been going for three years, so if notable, there should be some secondary sources out there (but I haven't been able to find them). Assize 10:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
• Weak delete/Merge. If the authors of the article, or anyone, can source some of the article to reliable sources indepedent of the subject, weak keep.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 12:17, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: There is plenty of case history for deleting articles of this sort, and this article does not appear to have reason to be an exception. Antelan ^talk 17:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per WP:N and lack of likely WP:RS, and smells just a little of schoolcruft. "The Vice-President supports the President and the rest of the Board in their duties" (together with a list of all in that position since its foundation - and every other position) is not something I'd expect to see in the dominant section of an article about a studio/comedy club. Orderinchaos 20:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Per nom as not meeting criteria of WP:N, WP:V, and WP:RS. The article contains a lot of original research, and as hinted at by Orderinchaos is just another example of the Schoolcruft that infests the wiki. Thewinchester ^(talk) 12:18, 11 June 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.