Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Neural Network 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 delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 23:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

International Neural Network Society

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

Originally a redirect to Neural Networks (journal). Article created in its original form by obvious COI editor, which was reverted to a redirect. Very similar article then created by, whose only other contribution is twice-failed AFC submission Draft:International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN).

Sources cited in the article are either:
 * primary: 1, 4, 5
 * passing mentions: all else

Other coverage of the organisation I was able to locate includes a few passing mentions in newspapers at the time of its founding; and a handful of passing mentions in an "oral history", which is mostly transcripts of interviews with people involved with the organisation.

In short, despite the existence of Stephen Grossberg and the journal, there does not seem sufficient inherent notability to meet either GNG or NORG. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academic journals and Technology. Triptothecottage (talk) 23:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Medicine.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  00:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't see the organisation having recieved signficant coverage, or at least signifcant enough to meet NORG, hence I would have to agree with the nominator. Golem08 (talk) 18:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NORG, WP:NOTINHERITED, and WP:SIGCOV. Other than the folks associated on its board, there is literally no evidence this organization is notable. I'm generally suspicious or organizations that have heavy-hitter boards but no visible presence of outcomes. Ordinarily, an organization does not inherit good notability from a notable board. Almost all the sources are primary and about folks associated with the organization, not about the organization itself or anything it's actually accomplished. Bearian (talk) 17:38, 30 April 2024 (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.