Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Society for Cryobiology


 * 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.  P h a e d r i e l  - 02:14, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

International Society for Cryobiology

 * moved to  – (View AfD) (View log)
 * moved to  – (View AfD) (View log)

Probably should be a CSD A7 speedy-delete but I thought I'd run it by here. Notability not asserted or established for this small group, and garners only 25 unique Google hits, several of which are primary sources (their own press releases) and a couple of which are Wikipedia mirrors. wikipediatrix 19:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't see much info for an International Society of Cryobiology, but the plain old Society for Cryobiology has been in the news, with articles dating back to 1964 . Are they the same thing? Zagalejo ^ ^  ^  20:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * On closer inspection, it would seem this article was improperly named and should just be renamed to Society for Cryobiology, if kept. Still, a Google search for "Society for Cryobiology" gets 611 unique hits and not all of these results appear to be about the same organization. wikipediatrix 21:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * WPD, could it be you are seeing hits for affiliate groups of the Society for Cryobiology? I wonder if you even know what you are looking at.--Fahrenheit451 22:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 04:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:NOTE or WP:CORP if you like, zero independent, reliable sources used. Aboutmovies 06:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Academic societies currently fall between the cracks of WP guidelines, fitting poorly into WP:CORP; however, an international society established in 1964, which runs a series of international conferences and publishes an academic journal would seem to have an inherent notability. The Google News link provided by Zagalejo shows clear coverage in the press. Should definitely be moved to the correct title of Society of Cryobiology, however. Espresso Addict 14:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Further comment. Wikipedia's article on cryobiology notes that the society is one of the two major ones in the field (the other is much smaller), and states that its journal Cryobiology is "the foremost scientific publication in this area". Espresso Addict 00:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I even found & added a specific reference--they apparently oppose the practice of cryonics & the various cryonics societies object to their interference. DGG (talk) 19:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep It's funny how some editors consider google hits to be a major factor in notability. Taking that notion in a pre-internet context, very few organizations or people would be notable. Agree on moving to Society for Cryobiology.--Fahrenheit451 19:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep; (and rename to Society for Cryobiology). I would think that being the actual publisher of an academic journal that we would unquestioningly accept as a reliable source is more than enough to be notable.  Cracks in WP:CORP non withstanding.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 02:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've moved it to the new name to avoid further confusion, and made sure all the AfD links still work or added new ones. Carcharoth 06:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename. Notable. • Lawrence Cohen  18:34, 14 September 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.