Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Art Therapy Association

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. postdlf (talk) 05:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

American Art Therapy Association[edit]

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

Article fails WP:NOTABILITY andWP:NOT. Article was created by an WP:SPA advertising-only account (Summer3212 (talk · contribs)) with no other edits other than related to American Art Therapy Association. Has a few links but they seem to be press releases and merely trivial coverage or mentions. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. which is clearly noted in the notability guidelines Seems to be nothing more than Self-promotion and product placement and advertising, which wikipedia is WP:NOT. Hu12 (talk) 18:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this one, I found plenty of news sources in the news link above and art therapy is a well known and studied profession, especially for special needs children. -G$ Gamer$unshine (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for a lack of notability. While "art therapy" is well known, this group isn't. Prsaucer1958 (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I think they are the leading authority, following the Books link I see over 5000 entries[1] and many of them seem like they hold the association in high esteem. Including the Journal of Art Therapy. I'll check that link too. G-money 23:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, actually the scholar link above might be better to start with[2], over 2000 leads including published papers from their annual conference which is in its 42nd year![3] G-money 23:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And here's the non-profit's 2008 budget showing annual revenues over a million with over half coming from memberships, that would suggest they are the largest group of their kind.G-money 00:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per User:Gamer$unshine. Hundreds of news links[4], hundreds of book links[5], tons of material at Google Scholar[6] all testify to the notability of this organization. Montreal Gazette: AATA "has become the body that sets the standard for art therapy in North America".[7] --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:15, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to art therapy. While I am concerned about the probable COI, this appears to be a major professional association, and the many potential sources attest to its likely notability. If it isn't kept, it should be merged as a new section in the main article. Bearian (talk) 15:29, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - regardless of notability theres plenty of good sources. --Kumioko (talk) 17:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:21, 24 March 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.