Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy


 * 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 as a week has suggested nothing else (NAC). SwisterTwister  talk  22:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

International Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable scientific organization tagged since June 2008. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 20:36, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - easily satisfies GNG. There are three reliable, independent sources that discuss it at length and are already cited for much of the material in this article: Lastovicka (2009); Thébault et al. (2015); Gubbins and Herrero-Bervera (2007). The 2008 tags should have been removed long ago. RockMagnetist(talk) 21:46, 8 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Any issues with notability or references should have been raised on the article's talk page. As this has not been done the tag is questionable, and that is the only basis given for deletion. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:24, 8 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have added some references to address notability. — Gorthian (talk) 02:16, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep This organization has an ongoing significant impact in its field - I guess I could say impact in its covered "fields" (plural). The new addition of reliable sources affirm the notability of this organization. Also, this organization has national and international prominence WP:NGO, not to mention it rigorously produces endorsed scientific standards. Steve Quinn (talk) 03:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep per RockMagnetist. The RS added to the article demonstrate notability per WP:GNG. --Mark viking (talk) 09:55, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep If the 'Encyclopedia of Geomagnetism and Paleomagnetism' thought it was notable enough to write a chapter about it then I think we should too. IAGA also appears in dozens of other Google Book hits. Mkdw talk 18:13, 12 July 2016 (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.