Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Associated Students of Pomona College


 * 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 no consensus. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 11:12, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Associated Students of Pomona College

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show it passes GNG. Was deprodded, citing the sources from LAist, as well as the Sumner and Lyon books, but both of those authors are associated with the university, and therefore are not independent.  Onel 5969  TT me 18:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 18:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep (albeit a little borderline) .See sources update. The LAist article clearly qualifies as the first source for notability. The Story of Pomona College and The History of Pomona College, 1887–1969 are both historical scholarly accounts of the college that discuss ASPC at length. While the authors were both associated with Pomona, both books were published through independent trade publishers (Pilgrim Press and the Castle Press, respectively) who had final say over the content and held the works to objective scholarly standards. Lyon's account in particular was praised for its scholarly detachment: The American Historical Review called it a "clear and objective account", and Pacific Historical Review notes Lyon's "established reputation as a professional historian" and says that "his even-handed devotion to [the college's] history is apparent on every page". Therefore, my view is that while the authors were not independent, the sources after review were. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 18:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I almost agree with Sdkb's analysis of the sources. Except I'm leaning toward weak delete because of the whole "even-handed devotion to [the college's] history is apparent on every page" thing. It's hard to call someone detached from the subject they are writing about while also saying they are devoted to it. So, I don't know. Would Lyon be writing about the school if he was not associated with it? Probably not. Is there something wrong with writing about a school your associated with? Not really, but I'm still borderline on saying the person is truly independent of the topic in that case. Especially considering his "devotion" to it. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I read that line as more referring to a scholarly devotion to the history than a personal devotion to the college. The reviewer reiterated the point pretty directly later in the review: "Lyon's detachment in writing this history has been exemplary." &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 23:12, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sources update: Okay, so I did the Newspapers.com search, which turned up quite a lot: "Associated Students of Pomona College" in quotes gave more than 500 results, despite the database not containing any publications based at the college. Some are of course trivial mentions (e.g. events with one line noting ASPC sponsorship), but others are clearly not. For instance, the April 1970 headline "Two Students Sharing Top Position" in the Los Angeles Times is about two students who ran jointly for ASPC president. That's a pretty clear GNG qualifier. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 20:24, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Generally, you have to be careful about using local newspaper coverage to show notability. If it was regional, or better national, coverage I'd go for that though. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , the L.A. Times definitely isn't local in my book—it's the largest newspaper in the U.S. not based on the East Coast, and pretty indisputably the newspaper of record for the greater Los Angeles region if not the entire West Coast. Sources like the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin are more local but still cover multiple cities across the Inland Empire region. However, even if we were to decide the Daily Bulletin and LAist don't count, the WP:AUD section of WP:NORG only asks for one non-local source. Cheers, &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 20:46, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * What matters is if it's local "coverage", not what news outlet it's being printed in. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. I fail to see how a student organization qualifies a encyclopedic material. I'm sure they have a website. Look, I found it!. There's a Zoom event scheduled for today! Wow! KidAd   talk  20:48, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , there's plenty of precedent for having articles on student governments. Category:Student governments in the United States has roughly 47 entries. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 20:54, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * ^WP:OTHERSTUFF. KidAd   talk  20:58, 5 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Pomona College: The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORGCRIT. The subject lacks multiple independent secondary sources providing significant coverage. Per WP:SIGCOV: ""Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail". WP:BEFORE revealed nothing beyond WP:ROUTINE coverage that would contribute to demonstrating WP:N.   // Timothy ::  talk  15:16, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , the article's sourcing has been significantly improved since the nomination. If you've not had a chance to do so, could you please review them? If you have, could you speak to why full articles in the Los Angeles Times and LAist and clearly non-trivial coverage in multiple scholarly histories do not count in your view? I'm concerned that there may be some follow the leader dynamics here, and since this isn't a vote, simple assertions of "does not meet GNG" are not going to count for much unless they're justified. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 16:26, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Reply The IS RS sourcing is about Pomona College (or the Claremont Colleges), not about Associated Students of Pomona College. There are no sources that provide SIGCOV directly and indepth for the subject. When the subject is mentioned in sources, it is in connection to the general student life at the college and that is where the article should redirect. There is routine, normal, run of the mill coverage, but nothing that shows the subject is notable.  // Timothy ::  talk  16:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , when the Los Angeles Times (which, as a national newspaper, is plainly not writing for a readership only of Pomona students) publishes the article I referenced above about the ASPC presidency, the main subject is clearly ASPC, not Pomona College. Similarly, LAists article about ASPC withdrawing funding for a party is clearly mainly about ASPC, not Pomona. The two historical books are mostly about Pomona, of course, but they each have direct, in-depth coverage of ASPC over multiple pages, which qualifies by our normal definition of significant. Pomona College covers ASPC very briefly in summary style, as it should, but it would be undue for it to discuss ASPC at the level of detail justified at ASPC's page by the reliable sourcing available, so a redirect/merge would be ill-advised. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb'  }&#125;  talk 18:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - the article's creator might be well suited to read WP:BLUDGEON. Onel 5969  TT me 00:12, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , well, it's hard for me to defend myself against that accusation without reinforcing it, but note that that essay applies to reiterating points that you've already made, not responding to arguments reasonably concisely. I try to trust that people will WP:READ the sources presented before !voting, making reiteration unnecessary. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 00:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Pomona College. I don't think this LA Times article can be construed to represent significant coverage in any way. Mentions in this add up to about a page, suprisingly little in a book that's supposed to be all about the college- if it really had independent notability, I'd honestly expect more. I can't read, but I'd imagine that it's similar. LAist isn't anything substantive, not really. It's a pretty minor story in a pretty minor paper. Particularly given that this must meet NORG's pretty high guideline, what I see is that Pomona College is clearly notable, but this org doesn't really stand on it's own. Can be merged to it's own nice sub-section in the main article. Eddie891 Talk Work 18:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Related discussion: Given 's question above about whether the college historical accounts qualify, I brought them to the Reliable Souces Noticeboard. Of the two editors who have weighed in so far, one considered both reliable and the other considered Lyon 1977 reliable but was unsure about Sumner 1914 without knowing more about how it was received. Lyon has the more substantial coverage of ASPC (page numbers are included in the citations). I note that NORG lists a book passage...focusing on a product or organization as an example of significant coverage. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 21:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. &#123;{u&#124;  Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 21:55, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. &#123;{u&#124;  Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 21:55, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 00:14, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:27, 18 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep I am not a big fan of the attempt to delete the article by the author of the AfD, prior to listing for deletion. I subsequently also see good faith efforts by the author of the article to improve the piece.--Concertmusic (talk) 23:16, 23 November 2020 (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.