Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birdwatchers' Field Club of Bangalore

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. Badly needs independent sources; it should be considered again if it does not get them. Chick Bowen 05:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birdwatchers' Field Club of Bangalore[edit]

Non-notable bird watching group. Ridernyc (talk) 10:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

delete as article creator (although in a bygone era when WP:NOTE did not exist) ! Shyamal (talk) 12:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Phoenix-wiki ^{talk · contribs} 19:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keilana^talk_(recall) 01:08, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this site is not an advert to promote clubs. Jelly the Supermodel (talk) 02:57, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can this user vote? No contributions to WP other than a few deletion demands. Suspect sock-puppet.212.71.37.74 (talk) 05:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. We have several articles on Bird Watching Societies. See Category:Ornithological organizations. This article is sourced and it does not particularly read like an advert. If it did read like an advert, it should be fixed, not deleted. I would however like to see something of its significance in India. --Bduke (talk) 05:03, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Legitimate notable organization. Sensiblekid (talk) 05:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The subject is significant enough for an article. -
Rustam
06:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete. An advert, not an article. Not the slightest sign of any real-world impact or notice. --Calton | Talk 13:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. So which unreal world does Bangalore belong to? Phil Bridger (talk) 22:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This article does read a bit like an advert. Notability for the club isn't established, and it appears to be a local club for the Bangalore area. "[non-commercial] Organizations whose activities are local in scope are usually not notable unless verifiable information from reliable independent sources can be found." --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Bangalore has a population of about 6.5 million, which is larger than the population of many countries. The Bangalore area extends beyond the city so must have an even larger population. I don't think you can call this an organisation whose activities are "local in scope". Phil Bridger (talk) 22:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Whilst perhaps not extremely notable, I say keep, although the article could certainly use copy-editing. Alloranleon (talk) 17:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 02:27, 5 January 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.