Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpha Omega Theta


 * 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. Deryck C. 12:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Alpha Omega Theta

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I found no significant coverage for this fraternity. Fails WP:ORG. SL93 (talk) 21:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 5 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  04:23, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 00:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete- As WP:TOOSOON. 2009 Xlibris book Fraternal Brotherhood: The Story of Alpha Omega Theta Fraternity Inc. by member Frederick M. Gross, and supposed 2014 film here. No current coverage found. (Belated signing) Dru of Id (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I added links to two books on the subject of Alpha Omega Theta via Google Books. One referencing actor Steve Buscemi's membership in AOT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.52.86.43 (talk) 02:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Relisted purely for the ip's efforts. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 08:56, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment By the looks of it, the Fraternal Brotherhood: The Story of Alpha Omega Theta Fraternity Inc. is a reliable source, with decent editorial control. That's plenty of significant coverage right there. If that's so, I'd say it's a keep, especially combined with the scraping-by source from the book The Pledge, which is barely a paragraph. If there are things wrong with the book (i.e., it's mostly fiction, or doesn't have significant coverage on the subject, which seems unlikely, since it's about the subject), then it's a delete. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:09, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * On what basis are you claiming that it is a reliable source with decent editorial control? It appears to be a self-published source (it's published through Xlibris, which is a self-publishing service) so that doesn't suggest any editorial control. It's the only book listed by that author name at Amazon, so there's not a writer with an existing reputation for accuracy. More importantly, one person feeling it was worth writing a book about doesn't say much for notability (if all it takes is one individual to believe a topic is worthwhile, we'd never delete any articles for notability, since the person choosing to post it would be notable enough. The book is number two-million-and-something on the Amazon sales chart, so that's no sign of a vast general interest in the topic. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If it's self-published, then I'm all for deletion. I didn't see that the first time around, but had my suspicions that something might be up with it (hence my carefully phrased comment rather than keep). 14:46, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If you want confirmation, you can see the publisher name listed on the book's Amazon listing, and can confirm that it's a self-publishing service either through their Wikipedia article or the website of the service itself. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:08, 5 February 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.