Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Geodetic Student Organisation

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) 16:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

International Geodetic Student Organisation[edit]

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

Contested prod. The deprodder's rationale is explained in detail on the talk page but is unconvincing. The sources used to establish notability are from sponsors, and therefore not independent. Delete. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No indication that it meets any of the notability standards as it is totally lacking in any significant independent coverage. Codf1977 (talk) 12:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do NOT Delete: I object to the deletion proposal for this article. I have listed additional sources on the article's Talk page, which will be noted in the article as soon as I have the time to write the listed enhancements. Hawei (talk) 12:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is none of those appear to be both significant and independent, both are needed if an organisation is to be shown as notable. You may also like to have a read of Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Codf1977 (talk) 12:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-read your criteria (WP:ORG, WP:RS) and added links to three reliable sources. Please see the article's talk page for further details and judge again. Again/still: Keep. Hawei (talk) 21:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not pass WP:ORG. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete author has proven that it clearly exists but this does not make it notable.NZ forever (talk) 07:33, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for accepting the reliable sources. Wikipedia has two standards for notability of a non-commercial organization (which the IGSO is) listed in WP:CLUB - and both are met: 1) IGSO's activities are on an international scale and 2) the information can be verified satisfying primary criteria (see above). Based on this officially agreed standard I would like to see your argument, why you think it is not notable. Again/still: Keep Hawei (talk) 21:15, 8 September 2010 (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.