Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Dakota Commission on Gaming

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. Daniel (talk) 22:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

South Dakota Commission on Gaming[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No sign of notability as it's stated in the following guidelines WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:VERIFYOR. Not enough significant coverage to meet WP:GNG. Bash7oven (talk) 15:58, 12 July 2021 (UTC) — Bash7oven (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep It's easy to find more coverage such as Legalized Casino Gaming in the United States – The Economic and Social Impact. Our policy WP:ATD therefore applies, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page." See also WP:BEFORE and WP:NEXIST. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:45, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. About thirty states have one of these review boards (commissions/agencies) charged with oversight of gambling in the state in question. According to this template, Wikipedia has started articles on about half of them. I like the idea of having a full set. There are ways to improve this article such as adding information about the size of SD's gambling economy, controversies about members of the commission or their actions, and actions they take that get them in the news. For example, they apparently just set forth a series of rules on sports betting which got a lot of coverage. Novellasyes (talk) 20:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:56, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Dakota-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:56, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:38, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not so much publish sources, but also was attracted to WP:ORG. Vsehmogushiy2 (talk) 13:25, 21 July 2021 (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.