Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama Council for Technology in Education


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Alabama Council for Technology in Education

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No notability for this organization mentioned, just brief explanation of. Seeing limited references in Google generally, over 4 years of existence, little improvement. Lucas20 (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Could use some work and sourcing, but a Google search does return a few sources.  -  down  load  |  sign!  19:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Noted, I see 5 hits (all time) from regional news sources, and a mere 417 from Google Search itself. Most with non-notable substance.  Clarify 'some work' ? -- Lucas20 (talk) 19:54, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete This is the sort of body that usually does not leave much in the way of a public record in secondary sources, and it is therefore hard to judge the importance, unless they do something pioneering that is actually notable. I think the likelihood is low, but if something actually significant is found, I'll change my !vote. DGG (talk) 15:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions.  --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:30, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:30, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:30, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep while Google News only finds five stories, the main Google search turns up dozens more, some covering the organization and many more covering the science fairs and other science competitions they cover. At least one of the sources is published in the UK so "regional" coverage (always a suspect criteria) is not a concern here.  Could the article be improved?  Probably, but that's a matter for cleanup, not AfD. - Dravecky (talk) 17:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per Dravecky. Spinach Monster (talk) 13:17, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Dravecky. Is Google News now the arbitror of Wiki acceptability? Good grief! God help us if someone adds an article about something unique and interesting but obscure (and thus with not much in Google). I'm serious, folks, this is an actual longstanding relevant NGO in Alabama educational circles. When did Wikipedia become so Patrician? Proxy User (talk) 21:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —TerriersFan (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2009 (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.