Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Association of the Aquatic and Marine Science Libraries and Information Centers (IAMSLIC)


 * 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   delete. Consensus is that the article fails the notability guideline and no evidence has been produced to refute this. Davewild (talk) 08:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

International Association of the Aquatic and Marine Science Libraries and Information Centers (IAMSLIC)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I had previously nominated this article for speedy after not being able to locate significant reliable source coverage. Speedy nomination was removed. Hence we are at AfD. Perhaps someone else will have better luck turning up significant reliable source coverage. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:36, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:36, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:22, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * How? Why? Simply linking to a policy, without explaining how it applies to this discussion, is not likely to be considered by an administrator in deciding how to close this discussion. Please see WP:JUSTAPOLICY for further explanation. First Light (talk) 01:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It fails WP:GNG by not having any independent sources. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:34, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 16 October 2011 (UTC)




 * Keep satisfies SimpsonDG (talk) 01:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * How? Why? Simply linking to a policy, without explaining how it applies to this discussion, is not likely to be considered by an administrator in deciding how to close this discussion. Please see WP:JUSTAPOLICY for further explanation. First Light (talk) 01:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment SimpsonDG, I haven't had similar luck discovering reliable sources which I imagine you are basing your !vote on. Would you be kind enough to share some of those reliable sources so we can see them? I'm happy to change my !vote if there is significant reliable source coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. I just haven't been able to locate it. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:56, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete I can't find any independent sources to satisfy WP:GNG. Polyamorph (talk) 09:53, 16 October 2011 (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.