Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cambridge University European Union 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. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 19:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cambridge University European Union Society[edit]

Non-notable Neutrality^talk 06:55, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested and required by members of various departments within Cambridge University, and necessary to raise awareness of society itself --RRowbottom (talk) 06:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:NOTADVERTISING. Neutrality^talk 07:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per nom. Non-notable.--Mitigate & Satiate (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC) Struck comment by banned user. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know what prompted the AfD? ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It fails WP:GNG and WP:GROUP. No significant coverage in independent, reliable media. Furthermore, I believe that the creating author is violating WP:CONFLICT. ThePointblank (talk) 10:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 12:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: A Google check does show some evidence of notability - independent sources referring to the society. But it really should be re-written to back up all assertions from these sources, as opposed to self-published references. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:ORG. Second choice would be a merge into the university or a list of student groups there. Stifle (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:ORG. I notice, in passing, that there are a number of pages on equally nn CU societies. TerriersFan (talk) 17:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I added a section to the article with 'Possible References', which gives all the independent sources I could find. Very weak ... Aymatth2 (talk) 18:15, 8 January 2009 (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.