Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concours Owners Group - COG

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. Cirt (talk) 02:03, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concours Owners Group - COG[edit]

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

Unremarkable organisation. Article does not establish notability of the club which primarily operates in North America and only concerns a single model, rather than an entire marque. Biker Biker (talk) 08:35, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep article needs improvement but some third party coverage [1]. LibStar (talk) 12:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it depends on your definition of "unremarkable". COG has been around for 20 years, it has 1,800 members which is quite a lot for a bike club for a single bike (as you point out). And over its history has had over 8,000 members. COG is open to ANY member regardless of their bike. We also help sponsor/run an OTP (Over The Pond) campaign to bring/take a member to/from our sister group (GTE Riders) in Europe. In addition we have about 500 members/Guests attend our National Rally each year. Not sure how many other Groups have that type of coverage? This is my first Wiki and I welcome any advice to improve it. --Colinp386 (talk) 22:07, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it must satisfy WP:ORG, number of members is irrelevant. LibStar (talk) 22:45, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. I will look to improve with links to the 3rd part coverage, any tips on how to improve the article would be appreciated. --Colinp386 (talk) 22:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just the very reason to be of note. The simple fact that the club is organized around a single marque states the strength of not only the marque, but that of the individual organization that is the officail representative of said marque. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.170.30.37 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So is this a 'keep'? tedder (talk) 07:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are some mentions in the gnews archive, but they are either simply mentions or in Rider Magazine, which is pretty far down the WP:RS totem pole. Further, there are mentions in books, but apparently nothing more than a mention. I'm somewhat surprised- I thought a bike like the Connie would have generated more coverage at a higher level than it has, and perhaps the new Connie is too new to produce a community. tedder (talk) 07:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest there is a difference between the size of the community and the amount of coverage they get. The COG community is very active with many events a year, multiple news letters to members etc. However as a Community/Non Profit Group, it does virtually no marketing or PR externally that's why it has little coverage in the news. Most of the community online interaction takes place on the original Group forum www.cogmos.com (225,850 Posts in 19,472 Topics by 9,660 Members. ) I guess what I am saying is that with COG its what they do thats notable not what they or others say. --Colinp386 (talk) 17:21, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colin- please see WP:BIG. Or, to compare another way (in a non-wiki argument), advrider doesn't have an article and it has 400k topics, 10M posts, and 115k members. tedder (talk) 17:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great point. I am one of those 115k members, I worked in the same company as one of the founders and I'm a huge fan (and customer) of the MacAskill family whose SmugMug empire fund Advrider, but I would never dream of creating an Advrider article. --Biker Biker (talk) 19:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tedder thanks for the WP:BIG let me get back to you after I have spent time reviewing. I suggest Advrider which appears to be highly popular forum is quite a different kettle of fish from the Concours Owners Group, so just because one would not create a Wiki page for Advrider is irrelevant to this discussion. I was not attempting to use the forum activity as an argument as justification not to delete the page, as I agree forum activity has little to do with notability. --Colinp386 (talk) 23:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You were couching the importance of COG in terms of the forum. I was providing an example, even though it isn't a valid argument, but gives a comparison (see also WP:OSE). However, ultimately the COG page needs to pass WP:N. If there aren't verifiable and reliable sources establishing the importance/significance of it, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. tedder (talk) 06:25, 14 November 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.