Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cornell Concert Commission (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED by the acts booked. Otherwise a non-notable business (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:29, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Cornell Concert Commission
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Cornell University club/organization. Insufficient significant coverage in independent third party sources to engender notability under the general notability guideline, or under Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies).

Coverage is limited to self-published sources; Cornell-related media, which does not show "sufficiently significant attention by the world at large" (as described in WP:N); or mere tangential coverage in reliable sources (which fails the Significant coverage" requirement). Basically, organizing cool concerts doesn't mean it's notable. Previous AFD expired w/o comment GrapedApe (talk) 03:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Procedural close Seriously, the previous AfD closed today with no consensus... Relisting it now will make absolutely no difference. Lukeno94 (talk) 10:16, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It was non-admin closed with no !votes. There's nothing wrong with a re-list.--GrapedApe (talk) 12:31, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It was closed a few hours before re-listing, and I'm fairly sure you're supposed to wait a while before relisting, regardless of consensus. Besides, relisting now when it was ignored before is unlikely to make any difference. Lukeno94 (talk) 13:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: No consensus closes due to a lack of quorum are, technically, WP:NPASR (no prejudice against speedy renomination). This is ... a really speedy renomination, but I guess that's what it says on the tin, so I don't think it's grounds for a procedural close.  On the merits, I'm pretty ambivalent about the article.  There's quite a bit of coverage of their hosted concerts in general, but I don't really see reliable third-party sources about the commission.  I'm not quite sure I'm willing to firmly advocate deletion here, but if this AFD doesn't attract a quorum on what is effectively its 4th relist, WP:SOFTDELETE may be the way to go. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 23:01, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * KEEP, CLOSE and lock for at least 30 days I was just looking at this and here it is again already! Was this done with a bot? We should have a wikipolicy about this sort of thing. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 00:07, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Looking at the references this is a notable organization. Stowonthewolder (talk) 01:51, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Which references do you believe are "significant coverage in independent sources" that show that the CCC has received "sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time.--GrapedApe (talk) 05:23, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Delete: Clearly The Cornell Daily Sun has a lot to say about them. Anyone else? Um .... Show me a good source outside Ithaca and I'll change my mind quickly. Until then, it's all fine and good they're Ivy League, but I went to a FCS school too.  Oh No! It's Faustus37!  it is what it is - speak at the tone 09:13, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 19:32, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep: 2nd nomination not a problem.  Its borderline, but I'm not convinced its not notable either.--Milowent • hasspoken  19:27, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. The only notability is the acts they book, but that sort of notability is not inherited--it's like saying a bookstore is notable because it has  books by famous authors on the shelves. Otherwise it's just a routine student organization, and the absence of any real content in the article shows it: If the individual concerts discussed are notable enough, then there can be separate article on them, or a mention of them in the articles on the group.  That the Agency booked the Grateful Dead doesn't make the agency notable. It is not too soon for relisting a no-consensus close a month afterwards; it would have been wrong had it been a keep.  DGG ( talk ) 22:12, 22 December 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.