Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Haifa Model United Nations Society

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 delete. Consensus is that the article does not meet the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 18:16, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

University of Haifa Model United Nations Society[edit]

Newer users, please note: Comments should be added to the end of this discussion page, not at the beginning. Thanks. Chzz ► 18:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

From the PROD, "Not (yet) notable. No evidence of significant coverage; a newly-formed society; see also WP:CRYSTAL WP:ORG". →Σ τ c. 01:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per my PROD reasoning; I see no evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources at this time (WP:GNG, WP:ORG) and I cannot find any such coverage - which is why I proposed deletion. Of course, if anyone can demonstrate such coverage, please let me know. I've also asked on WikiProject Israel in-case there may be sources in other languages. Chzz ► 01:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. There are no assertions of notability and Wikipedia is not a directory or a way to promote an organization.--TM 01:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ORG. This is just one of many local Model United Nations organizations and is not clearly notable in itself. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
mikerp1986- please take note that after this deletion request was raised, 2 external references (Haifa u in English and online journal of Haifa in Hebrew) were added to prove existence and actual achievement of what is written — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikerp1986 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of those is http://newmedia-eng.haifa.ac.il/?p=5512 - published by the university; so not really showing any significant coverage of this small club outside the uni itself. The other is http://www1.haifa.muni.il/news/20110727/newsletter.html which is in Hebrew, so really I need advice over how significant/reliable that is. Chzz ► 03:13, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

mikerp1986- added another article about us from "Yediot Haifa" about our achievements in the euroMUN- considered the biggest local newspaper in the Haifa metropolis, the journal i posted earlier is from the city municipality itself, this newspaper is privately owned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikerp1986 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sefishalem- I really don't see a reason to delete this article. The fact that this is a local club dosen't mean that it is not important enought to have its own article. This article's purpose is not to promote the organization, but rather informative. In addition there are avidance of the achievments mentioned in the article with the form of local press coverege. --Sefishalem (talk) 15:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I can not find any secondary sources about this local group, but I would go along with a merge into the Model United Nations article, to be kind to the newbies. Bearian (talk) 19:08, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Redirect to University of Haifa.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 01:29, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

mikerp1986- in continuation to bearian above, i feel this whole situation was a major biting incident. i understand that perhaps the article wasn't covered enough as required, but external sources are added in to the article since i received the deletion notice- but was this really a way to help a new editor improve the article? putting his article on deletion call within 60 seconds that he enters the help forum? very offended, and even if this article will hopefully not be deleted, i personally will think twice before adding knowledge to Wikipedia and give notice to all my friends as well. extremely negative first experience for me as a wiki article writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.64.98.136 (talk) 16:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC) Mikerp1986 (talk) 16:49, 19 October 2011 (UTC)mikerp1986- once again, ive added a dutch article giving coverage on our visit during the euroMUN. since my last post i also noticed that there is a hint of accusation of me using multiple accounts even though i made it clear that my friend, a fellow wiki editor who is even newer than myself to this system, might of used my article as a guideline to creating an article on an umbrella organization for Israeli MUN societies. BITE BITE BITE.....[reply]

to further emphasize my novice experience in writing articles, i would appreciate it if someon could please help me and teach me how to write references for external links properly? ive added theem meanwhile in a very poor manner, just so that i can get it in and try and save this article, but if hopefully this article will be spared i would appreciate it if someone could show me how so i can improve the article's design and aesthetics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikerp1986 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added help on referencing, on the user's talk page [1] Chzz ► 17:22, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SefiShalem: 8 references have been added in proper citation form, so I beleive that right now there is sufficiant avidance that this organization does exist and operates as mentioned in the article. Therefore I belive that the "Article for deletion" banner should be removed. --Sefishalem (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunatly, WP:ITEXISTS isn't sufficicent reason to keep an article on something. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Chzz's reasoning was correct --Neutrality^talk 00:27, 25 October 2011 (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.