Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AMS Student Nest


 * 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 merge to University of British Columbia. Consensus is sourcing isn't sufficient for a standalone article Star   Mississippi  01:40, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

AMS Student Nest

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

non notable andpromotional. The references are not independent  DGG ( talk ) 10:11, 2 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  11:51, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 10:28, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I've added some new references. Sure, the article is written in a promotional way, but I think there are enough sources out there for it to meet WP:GNG. NemesisAT (talk) 14:20, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:43, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Keep or merge? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep: I think NemesisAT found some good sources, yep theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:19, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to University of British Columbia. Was about to close this but the new sources don't check out. Ubyssey.ca is a student paper, insufficiently independent (or reliable) for our purposes. Vancouver Foodster is a personal blog. The Georgia Straight ("free weekly") and the Daily Hive ("hyperlocal content") are okay but do not together pose wider than local notability. It would be sufficient to add a few sentences of context in the existing, parent section for how this topic is minimally covered in sources. (The bulk of this current article is too detailed for our purposes, owing that it comes from primary and not secondary sources. This content should just be removed.) czar  18:27, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge I mostly agree with Czar on the source analysis, and think a selective merge would put this content in better context. I do note that WP:AUD (about local sources) is part of WP:NCORP, which does not apply here. So, I believe these sources contribute to notability. But having only two isn't enough for me. It's a young building, so I wouldn't be surprised if it does become notable in the future. Femke (talk) 12:12, 23 July 2022 (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.