Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Woman's Club of Fayetteville

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. (non-admin closure) Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 06:05, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Woman's Club of Fayetteville

Non-notable organization, currently unsourced. My own search found no references except the local newspaper. Was prodded, prod removed without improvement by the author. Huon (talk) 14:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - fixed it up just a bit. If a cite can be provided for the first library thing, I think it deserves a keep. 99.149.172.83 (talk) 17:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also: I've contacted the editor-in-chief of Fayetteville's newspaper, and he'll get back to me later about A) founding, B) library, and C) impact. I think this article has potential (particularly if the library thing checks out, among other things). 99.149.172.83 (talk) 18:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Want everyone to know I'm the IP above. Got a few cites. I've rewritten it a bit; trying to get cites for the library yet. 127.0.0.1 (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I have the book you're looking for. It's called "Hometown Heritage Vol. II" by Lucille Miller Johnson. It's a rather obscure book (along with it's companion, Volume I, which I'm waiting to come available for checkout) Both books are available for reference in the Main Cumb. Pub. Library in the history/geneology section upstairs - if you're from around here and don't want to wait for the Fayetteville Observer's editor to get back to you.

As far as the wiki page, I did update the the references to include Ms. Johnson's book. I sincerely hope I'm posting this note in the right manner! I started the page, and I'd like to see it stay! kelliejojo (talk) 17:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the references don't show why its notable on a wide scale. We66er (talk) 19:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. This organization is clearly verifiable and I'm inclined to keep it around as a historical women's organization. The article hasn't been around long, I say let it stay and see if it can be improved. Crypticfirefly (talk) 05:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm working to improve the article to make it more "encyclopedia-like." I will continue to drum up useful information and add it asap.

kelliejojo (talk) 01:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - until such time as somebody points me to the "Local" clause of WP:N, I'm inclined to accept it as notable. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 02:48, 3 October 2008 (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.