Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian Market and Social Research Society Limited


 * 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 ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Australian Market and Social Research Society Limited

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

Notability not established; no third-party sources. Promotional tone. KurtRaschke (talk) 22:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC) WEak Keep per the ones Eastmain found above and these, which include The Age and Sunday Times. I think it's enough to pass WP:CORP TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 23:29, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The news items at http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Australian+Market+and+Social+Research+Society%22&btnG=Search+Archives&hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8 may be of interest. --Eastmain (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 22:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep It is certainly notable and important; this article just needs some work. Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep As Eastmain has shown there are sources and as WP:DEL says "If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion."--Captain-tucker (talk) 01:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Article in desperate need of attention but is a professional body, much like the Australian Computer Society or Royal Australian Chemical Institute. Orderinchaos 08:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, I know that this will probably be controversial, but none of the links presented above are actually about the organisation, as required by WP:ORG. They seem for the most part (at least in the ones that are in languages I can read) to just quote someone from the organisation, rather than going on about who they are or what they do.  Only 67 pages actually link to their home page.  I am of course willing to retract this argument if notability can be demonstrated in some other way.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 10:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC).
 * comment - they seem better known as the Market Research Society of Australia. Against this name there appears to be a mite more interest than the current one - Peripitus (Talk) 23:37, 31 May 2008 (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.