Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gwinnett ARES


 * 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 consensus to redirect. Further redirecting can be discussed on the article's talk page etc. - Daniel.Bryant 22:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Gwinnett ARES

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

disputed PROD for local radio club delete Cornell Rockey 13:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC) (UTC)
 *  Delete Redirect to ARES: not every local organization is notable, and this one certainly isn't. (de K5ZC) -- Jay Maynard 14:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC) ... Okkay, I'm persuaded a redirect is a Good Thing. Any useful text can be merged. -- Jay Maynard 13:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * KEEP Strong Keep This organization maintains an active radio station with international transmit capabilities. It has developed notability which has been written up several times in a national publication. Anonym1ty 20:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Which national publication? If it's not one outside ham radio, it doesn't count. -- Jay Maynard 23:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Keep or merge into Amateur Radio Emergency Services. ARES organizations are more than some high-school club.  The content should be kept if not the article itself. StuffOfInterest 22:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object to merging into ARES, but why is a county-level ARES organization notable? -- Jay Maynard 23:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * --Because of what they do! The same reason anything is notable. Did you read the articles in the publications? This group is notable in its own right. Anonym1ty 00:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Only one of the cited links was to a non-ham publication, and that one was a local circular. Lots of local ham clubs (which, in the final analysis, is all that this is) do public service and get quoted in their local paper. Wikipedia's standard is that a local club needs more notability than that. -- Jay Maynard 01:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I read WP:N and I think your adding more to it than whats there. Also, Every radio station has an article in Wikipedia, Why is this different? They maintain a radio station, and unlike your local FM radio station, this one can be heard internationally. As for notability, that right there should cover it. WP:N doesn't say it can't be a ham radio publication, besides it is a national publication. and there is also a non-ham publication mentioned I say EXPAND Anonym1ty 15:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Is the radio station they maintain a broadcast radio station, or a ham station? It takes something the class of W1AW to be notable by Wikipedia standards. My HF station can be heard internationally, but it's not notable. -- Jay Maynard 16:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, merely having an HF station is not sufficient to establish activity at a national or international level, as required by WP:N. I'm not running down Gwinett ARES; it's just that a local organization (which this one is, by its very nature) is not notable by Wikipedia standards unless it's achieved recognition on a wider stage, which this one hasn't. -- Jay Maynard 16:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree completely. Anonym1ty 22:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This article should be expanded or merged into ARES at the very least, but preferrably should be kept. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kc9eow (talk • contribs) 23:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Redirect to ARES. Possible merge.  One local ARES group may not be more notable than another. --Dennisthe2 00:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That is an incorrect statement right there, one ARES organization may very well be more notable than another. That's a made-up lazy answer. Anonym1ty 15:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to ARES and possible merge LazyDaisy 13:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Expansion of this article would definitely be of benefit. Any subgroup has the potential of being notable on it's own. Also, recognition in subject-oriented publications does, indeed, contribute to notability. thistlechick 16:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Possible redirect and/or merge to ARES This one fails the notability requirements of WP:N (specifically the primary notability criterion) and as such needs to go(IMHO) until its notability changes. Oh yes, I have international transmit capability and have been included in several logs of HamOps worldwide, and been written about on 3 different occasions in reliable sources but that does not make me "notable". I have a compromise idea: Why not get the trustee and several members of the org. to make a user page and redirect to it from GC ARES? Or is that a violation of policy? Easy biters, I'm still new at this...(de AI4FU)Radiooperator 11:20, 1 February 2007
 * Keep And expand, i think maybe there is more to Gwinnett ARES and many of the other ARES and even RACES. I think the scope of this delete is unfounded. I think we should be asking why delete rather than why keep.  There seems to me to be plenty of documentation attached to this article of "national" even "international" interest.  Is the goal of wikkipedia to be complete Not necessarily.  Is the goal of wikkipedia to be as short and succinct as possible, maybe, but without loss of generality. I think by leaving this and other such groups out it devalues the hobby, by not allowing the recognition to be seen.  ARRL is a national organizaion, to say not to use because it's articles are by hams (often about hams) is ludicrous.  I dont think wikkipedia's intention is to dissallow all publications by hams in reference articles about ham radio. The scope of that is rediculous.  Its like saying all articles about science cannot be written by scientists.  I think i'd need to see some more convincing reasons to delete or merge. c8h10n4o2 17:59, 2 February 2007 (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.