Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ICUMSA 25


 * 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. The article's title should be discussed at the talk page. ( X! ·  talk )  · @106  · 01:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

ICUMSA 25

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Somewhat incoherent article but I gather it is a standard used in sugar manufacture. No evidence of notability. Contested prod. &mdash; RHaworth 02:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete-As above (incoherent, no refs, notability is questionable)...-- iBentalk/contribs If you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 03:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment This is difficult. This does seem to be a genuine widely accepted standard, which suggests to me that it is worth an article. However, I agree that the article is incoherent, and really in its present form it is not worth keeping, so the question arises of finding sources to write a better article, and I have searched for such articles. However, I have found numerous sources quoting ICUMSA 25 for particular batches of sugar, but no sources at all telling us what ICUMSA 25 is. This makes it impossible to write an article conforming to Wikipedia notability criteria, or even to provide references for the current version of the article. Unfortunately this looks like a "delete", but I am not prepared to commit myself to that yet, int he hope that someone can find sources so that we can improve the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think the article is better now. I added some information from newspaper articles and the ICUMSA website. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, certainly better, thanks to Eastmain. However, there is still room for improvement, if anyone can do better. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep and rename to International Commission for Uniform Methods of Sugar Analysis (note typo: the current "Method" gets fewer hits), with a redirect at ICUMSA. Eastmain's improvements and a Google book search convince me that the ICUMSA passes WP:ORG. However, the "25" in the current title seems to be an arbitrary level of sugar quality that is not part of the notability of the subject. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename David Eppstein's reasoning seems good to me. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:37, 3 February 2010 (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.