Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Germany Philatelic Society


 * 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. While sourcing has been identified, there remain concerns about whether it's of the depth and refers to the subject. I don't see a third relist changing that. As this is not a BLP, and in fact not a person, sourcing concerns are less a reason to lean delete when consensus is thin. Star  Mississippi  01:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Germany Philatelic Society

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

No indication of notability (as the concept is understood in en:Wikipedia) in this polite advertisement for a US organization for the study of German stamps.

Editors more energetic than I am may wish to look for examples of the same thing in Category:Philatelic organizations. (I've already noticed a number that look similar.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:56, 1 May 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  11:30, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Germany,  and Canada.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:05, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete this organization is clearly not notable. We have a lot of coverage of things and people related to stamps that do not meet inclusion guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep To my surprise, I'm finding significant coverage about this group over the decade. Baltimore Sun 1965, Daily Herald 2005, Annapolis Capita 2003. Nfitz (talk) 00:36, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  00:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per Nfitz. Atchom (talk) 20:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete since subject fails the notability criterion. I just cannot duplicate the subject's "significant coverage" claimed by colleague Nfitz. We have already in the article the link to the society's own page, the only citation so far, and then: A Baltimore Sun piece back from 1965 that is inaccessible without registration; a clip from Arlington Heights' Daily Herald about the "48th COMPEX stamp show in Arlington Heights" and not about our subejct, which is simply listed among other organizations; and lastly a report from The Capital newspaper whose subject is a stamps collector and not our subject. We are trying to assign notability to this oganization on the basis of the possible notability of others, such as that teacher interviewed by The Capital. Additional search scares up sources such as this, i.e. of little worthiness, which is the same thing one could say about our subject's merits. Wikipedia is not a collection of random information, nor is it a catalog. -The Gnome (talk) 17:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
 * There's no doubt, that the Daily Herald reference is the weakest of the three I provided, and more of a mention - and I agree if that was the only one I provided, this would be a delete. But to say that The Capital article, that the subject is a stamp collector rather than the Society, seems exaggerated to me, given that the collector (Christopher Deterding) was the secretary-treasurer of the Germany Philatelic Society, and the 18-paragraph article, that's the centrepiece of the page, and continued on the following page, does discuss the Society itself; I'm not sure the concern about this article. While the one you cannot see, the 20-paragraph article in the Baltimore Sun is primarily about the organization and their 1965 convention. Can you see this clip? Nfitz (talk) 18:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Mild Keep I get more than a few hits in Linn's Stamp News about them,, with the newspaper article above, I think we have enough to keep. Oaktree b (talk) 01:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, this reference as well is about something else and not our subject. It's a 2016 letter about an esoteric issue ("shades" on a stamp) published in Linn's Stamp News, a "newsmagazine for stamp collectors", in which it is mentioned, in passing, that the letter writer used to be a member of the philatelic society. Nothing more. -The Gnome (talk) 16:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. I also found news coverage just by casually Googling it. It’s clearly a significant organization that meets general notability guidelines. I’m not sure why there is a sudden flood of calls to delete these stamp-related articles either. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 23:36, 25 May 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.