Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ICCF Finland
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 keep. JohnCD (talk) 16:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- ICCF Finland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subdivision of parent company which doens't have an article. Dubious notability, minimal sourcing. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- International Correspondence Chess Federation <- this parent "company"? —Ruud 12:43, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete - It seems to be a *very* old organisation, but whether it has had significant coverage outside of specialist chess publications I just don't know. Finnish is an impenetrable language! The request for independent citations has been on the article for over 18 months with no improvement. Sionk (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral, leaning merge I found this, but that's all, with a pretty specific Google news search. So, Merge to the ICCF article Ruud Koot "discovered". Jclemens (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per WP:BEFORE. There are several similar organization in Category:Regional ICCF organisations. Try discussing what to do with them first at WikiProject Chess (or WikiProject Finland). —Ruud 12:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That's an WP:OTHERSTUFF argument you are making, nothing to do with WP:BEFORE. Sionk (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- No, because there's a lot of other stuff this should have been discussed at the appropriate WikiProject before sending it to AfD. They may help in finding appropriate sources or suggest all the articles should be merged or that this, some or all the articles should indeed end up at AfD. —Ruud 13:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That's an WP:OTHERSTUFF argument you are making, nothing to do with WP:BEFORE. Sionk (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep We usually make articles for national organization in the field of sports -- and ,for that matter, in most other areas also, and this is the national organization for the field. We have articles on many of the others, and they show that there will be plenty to say for all of them. Lookingat some of the others, there's too much to usefully merge. DGG ( talk ) 05:49, 13 February 2012 (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.