Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1439 (Skelmersdale) Squadron


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

1439 (Skelmersdale) Squadron

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Cadet training squadrons are not notable per previous AfD discussions, contested prod MilborneOne (talk) 23:06, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. MilborneOne (talk) 23:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. MilborneOne (talk) 23:13, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Please note the article originator has moved the article to Skelmersdale Cadet Forces after it was nominated for deletion. Also note adding army and navy cadet forces to the article still doesnt make it notable. MilborneOne (talk) 23:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment 1439 Sqn should be considered notable for a few reasons;

1, it was the first Sqn to forge links with Canada 2, the death of one its cadet sparked a change in policy for the operation of the Viking T1 3, it is the largest youth organisation in Skelmersdale, a deprived area. 4, it has a long standing and history in the town since long before the towns expansion in the 1960s.

Recognising that other ATC Sqns are not noteworthy and to maintain an important presence on Wikipedia I have expanded the article to include the other cadet forces in Skelmersdale and will invite them to add content. Potentially other youth organisations in Skelmersdale such as the Church Army and Boy and Girls Brigades will also add content, but only if the page remains. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuusha (talk • contribs) 23:39, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This comment suggests that the author has misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. We are not a directory for local organisations to add information about themselves, but an encyclopaedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - No references that show notability, essentially a promotional article only, not a notable organization. As per WP:ORG "As a general rule, the individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not considered notable enough to warrant a separate article - unless they are substantially discussed by reliable independent sources that extend beyond the chapter's local area." This isn't and thus doesn't qualify. The page move now means that the article isn't even on one single subject and makes it even less an encyclopedic topic. - Ahunt (talk) 23:54, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cadet units are not generally notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Lack of references showing notability. Previous discussions have indicated that Cadet units are not them sufficiently notable to warrant an article.  EricSerge (talk) 02:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.