Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxford University Democratic Socialist 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 . Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:27, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford University Democratic Socialist Club

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Single ref on the page with only passing reference to the subject. I see various potential sources that look to be reliable but are only passing mentions. I don't see anything substantial that meets the GNG or NORG JMWt (talk) 09:44, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and England. JMWt (talk) 09:44, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: just checking the first links at Google Scholar leads to "Oxford and the Labour Movement" by Brian Harrison (historian) which has two full paragraphs of detailed coverage. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 09:12, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: to Oxford University Labour Club. --Bduke (talk) 07:22, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There are no reliable, independent sources. The first reference cited is a conflict of interest because the paper's author is affiliated with the subject of this article. The second source is an obituary, for which editors can write obituaries based on public requests and/or submissions. The third source is a book in which the author may be financially connected to the subject. Reliable sources need to be added, if they exist. Multi7001 (talk) 02:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are seriously trying to suggest that an article in an academic journal by the leading historian Sir Brian Howard Harrison FBA who was only six at the time the organisation in question disappeared is not a reliable independent source? Jonathan A Jones (talk) 07:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

he may well be reliable but it is debatable if he is independent when attempting to find sources to show notability. It isn't beyond the bounds of possibility that an academic who is close to the subject (in terms of working at Oxford Uni) believes it to be important because they have a connection. Absolutely understandable but perhaps those who are not closely associated with Oxford University think that we need more than one Don writing about a small part of the history of the students of that institution to show that it meets the notability standards. JMWt (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's really no shortage of sources here: they are just mostly books and sometimes a little hard to track down. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 13:56, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been tagged for notability for many years. It is now important that we have RS that consensus agrees meet the GNG. JMWt (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, which is why I have added five reliable sources since the AFD started. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 17:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:23, 21 April 2023 (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.