Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Association of Seventh-day Adventist Librarians


 * 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. No clear consensus after two weeks. Owen&times; &#9742;  16:47, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Association of Seventh-day Adventist Librarians

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not a notable organization. BelloWello (talk) 01:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - A scholarly organisation providing service to SDA. Listed in Bowker, Library and Trade Index; a number of external references exist in Google Books and Google Scholar. --Whiteguru (talk) 23:49, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete; can't find significant coverage in third-party sources. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 03:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - Informative and non-spammy succinct piece that to my mind is already showing sufficient sourcing in the footnotes (4, 5, 7). Scholarly organizations should have a much lower bar than commercial enterprises, in my view, and this is a nicely done little piece that is a credit to Wikipedia. Carrite (talk) 14:25, 30 April 2011 (UTC) last edit: Carrite (talk) 14:26, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only self-referential sources are available. Organization not notable outside its own circle. Binksternet (talk) 08:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete nothing in gnews. gbooks listing merely confirm existence, no indepth coverage thus failing WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 07:06, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems like an important org & has several refs. Needs work though.  FieldMarine (talk) 03:04, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * the references are mainly its website and not independent third party sources thus failing WP:RS. LibStar (talk) 03:20, 5 May 2011 (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.