Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanford Flipside

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. — Aitias // discussion 20:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stanford Flipside[edit]

This organization is newly created at a US university and doesn't establish notability and has no reliable third party sources. 16x9 (talk) 16:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question – Way wouldn’t you just merge and redirect to Stanford University? ShoesssS ^Talk 16:41, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because it isn't notable for even that article. It is a student organization that was just created this year. 16x9 (talk) 17:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A student university newspaper, endorsed and officially recognized by that same major university, is not notable in your opinion, to be included, say under student activities, of that univeristy piece? I am not meaning to sound or be sarcastic, I am just trying to point you in the right direction. Fair enough? 17:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)ShoesssS ^Talk

I would say the campus newspaper for a major university is notable hint The Stanford Daily or even The Stanford Review. This site has no third party sources or offer any notability besides being connected to Stanford. Should all organization endorsed and officially recognized have their own wiki article ? 16x9 (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -No, but you are getting close to my suggestion. If you reread my original statement, it was phrased as a question and not an opinion on whether to Keep or Delete the piece. In fact, you are right, this should not be a stand-alone piece, at this time. However, it is a perfect candidate for a merge/redirect. In that all editors have the right to move and redirect articles you didn’t need to bring this to AFD, you could just move it over and redirect. No fuss-no muss :-). That was the point I was trying to lead you to. OK? ShoesssS ^Talk 18:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Stanford Flipside is notable within Stanford University, and Stanford University is notable, so I think this article should be notable. Also I think that its notability is separate from the fact that it started this year. jkeesh —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, StarM 23:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 00:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No independent sources. I agree with 16X9 about the standards for student publications--the main student newspaper or magazine is notable, and some places may haver more than one of each. But a new humor magazine is very unlikely to be notable. Perhaps this can be merged, but it would have to be to something more specific than the main university page. DGG (talk) 19:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I agree that a stand alone article is not warranted. I believe I said the same thing, just above. I suggested a merge under student activitie swhere similar items are listed. Thanks. ShoesssS ^Talk 20:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why the fact that it's "endorsed and officially recognized" means it warrants a mention at Stanford University. If no sources independent of Stanford have taken note of this student publication, why does it warrant a mention anywhere on Wikipedia? 98.122.44.244 (talk) 20:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Once a University endorse and acknowledges a group – project – activity, they are pledging the full support and reputation of the University. Which I believe bestows a certain amount of notability when coming from a major and notable University. If that were not the case and under a philosophy that all organizations must be notable on their own rights, groups like the Stanford Astronomical Society or the Harvard Wireless Club should also be deleted from the articles. Hope this makes my point a little clearer. Thanks. ShoesssS ^Talk 20:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- More than likely the "endorsement" is more a formality given to any student group that asks after following certain procedures... notability does not dribble down to ever small piss hole on earth. In the case of Harvard Wireless Club it asserts its notability in the article being the oldest "ham radio" club in the nation, something Flipside does not. 16x9 (talk) 02:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - “Piss hole” - Stanford University - by my standards you may want to rethink that argument. ShoesssS ^Talk 03:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The lack of independent sources is fatal — all articles, including any article one might merge this to, need them. Stifle (talk) 12:58, 6 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.