Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brooklyn college APD


 * 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. Shimeru (talk) 07:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Brooklyn college APD

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Does not meet notability standards NYCRuss   ☎  14:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Individual chapters of college fraternities and other organizations that exist at only a single school are generally non-notable per WP:ORG. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The stub makes it clear that it is a multi-university fraternity. Rich Farmbrough, 16:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Indeed but my reading is that Metropolitan90 is saying that this chapter only exists at a single school though I agree that his phrasing is ambiguous. Bridgeplayer (talk) 20:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry for any ambiguity in my statement. As Bridgeplayer said, I meant that the Brooklyn College APD exists only at a single school (since it is the chapter for Brooklyn College of the national APD organization) and thus is non-notable. The national APD organization has chapters at multiple schools and so I would not object to that article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:32, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - individual chapters need the necessary reliable sources to meet WP:ORG and this page has none. Bridgeplayer (talk) 15:56, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The page has none, it is am unref stub. That is not enough for deletion, some attempt should be made to find them. Rich Farmbrough, 16:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Failing to to meet WP:ORG is a perfectly decent reason to delete. There has been some attempt to find sources - I have tried, presumably you have tried .... Bridgeplayer (talk) 20:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Merge to the parent article, let that split as and when necessary. Rich Farmbrough, 16:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Firstly we cannot merge unsourced material. These searches have drawn blanks - . This search repeats the claim of being the oldest fraternity on campus but none of the sources are reliable. Secondly, even if the claims could be independently and reliably stood up a merge wouldn't dovetail well into the parent article. Putting a small piece on one chapter in the main article doesn't make good sense; however if there was a section/sub-page listing all the individual chapters with their foundation date and well-sourced that would be a different matter. Bridgeplayer (talk) 20:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note, a user has tried adding a listing of all chapters at the parent article (example); but it has been reverted by multiple editors on the grounds of it being an unencyclopedic directory (among other reasons given). It may be an issue for its own RFC. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:18, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.