Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clare Hall Boat 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 no consensus. The arguments are all over the place and not really pointing to any conclusion. I suggest waiting a bit before retrying. At this time, there isn't a clear consensus and leaving it open another week isn't likely to change that. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clare Hall Boat Club

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (organizations) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Andrew Davidson with the following rationale "remove prod &c.". Which, sadly, doesn't explain anything. Why should we keep this entry of what seems to me is an organization that fails GNG? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:27, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 10:50, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If we have Category:Rowing clubs of the University of Cambridge, then I think we have to accept that each college will have a club, and that each provably existent club belongs on WP. We certainly shouldn't make an editorial choice that only favoured colleges are recorded. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:46, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is only an illustration of how much more YELLOWPAGE-like spam we have to delete. We need to start somewhere. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 19:42, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The topic passes WP:GNG. See also WP:BEFORE and WP:ATD. Andrew D. (talk) 23:34, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ITSNOTABLE is not a valid argument. You need to say why. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 19:42, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discussion of specific reliable, secondary sources would help
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar 21:35, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- "One of the youngest and smallest" clubs is not exactly a claim to notability. The article is mostly self-cited & reads like it came from the club's Facebook page. No encyclopedic relevance here. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:11, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sourcing may be difficult, because most citations are likely to be only in print. Anyone who thinks that any Cambridge college boat club is non-notable knows nothing about Cambridge University. (Full disclosure: I studied at another college, and had no interest whatsoever in rowing.) Narky Blert (talk) 00:15, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.