Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies


 * 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. No prejudice against merging.  Arbitrarily0  ( talk ) 02:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I see this organization briefly mentioned as a funder of research in various news or scholarly articles but cannot locate in-depth sources that would satisfy WP:NORG. The only independent source cited that might have significant coverage is GuideStar Pro which I cannot access. [Edit: it doesn't, see below]. This source looks independent but actually, its author is listed as a contact person for FAMSI. In any event, multiple independent sources with in-depth coverage are required to meet WP:NORG. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  17:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Organizations, Latin America, Mexico,  and Florida. Skynxnex (talk) 20:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep -- The alternative might be to merge to Los Angeles County Museum of Art into which it merged, but such an article merger would upset the balance of the target. The fact that the foundation no longer exists is not a reason for deletion.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:05, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * What coverage is compliant with NORG? Without the coverage it cannot be kept according to English Wikipedia rules. Most of the article is self sourced anyway so should be just deleted. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  16:58, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep -- or include as a section under the Los Angeles County Museum of Art article? GuideStar and APA have profiles on it, and there exist scholarly articles on the organisation or its activity (I don't think the article linked by is not independent as, though the author is FAMSI-affiliated, the journal itself is not, such that this still looks like an independent source to me). So unless author-affiliations make academic articles non-independent, it seems like this org meets either NORG or general notability guidelines (as a non-profit educational org, I think it's allowed to meet either). [Though I'm the original author so someone else weigh in :)] Asdfjrjjj (talk) 21:50, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Wp:Independent makes it clear that any source whose author has a conflict of interest in the organization or is closely affiliated, is not an independent source. Would you mind emailing me the GuideStar and APA sources so that I can verify if they provide independent coverage? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  21:58, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Ahh sorry, in that case ignore the part re the quoted / linked article, though there might be others from non-affiliates! Will email in a few (APA source is linked on article and free to access :) Asdfjrjjj (talk) 22:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no content on the APA link unless it is not loading properly for me. Thanks for sending the email but all I see are some data fields and two paragraphs of text supplied by FAMSI itself, thus no significant, independent coverage. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:15, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep--with the potential option to merge to Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Petra0922 (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge to Los Angeles County Museum of Art. I think it's inaccurate to describe the Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies as simply a non-profit that dissolved, because it is still a very much in existence as web resource for research. While now administrated by the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, it still operates under the name of the Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies. http://www.famsi.org is a major resource for Academics researching in pre-Columbian studies. There is some coverage on the website and its use in research in . The present article should really be updated to a present tense format describing the current website and its use in research; while acknowledging its past origins as a non-profit; or it should be merged in the LACMA with content on the existing research website. Best.4meter4 (talk) 23:57, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if this source has significant coverage of FAMSI (I cannot verify that it even exists), multiple independent sources with significant coverage are required to meet WP:NORG and therefore keep the article. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  00:10, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @ As it's no longer an organization. WP:NORG is not the right policy. WP:WEB would be the correct notability policy for the website.4meter4 (talk) 01:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:WEBCRIT has the same requirement: "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:30, 9 October 2022 (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.