Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JCI Ralston


 * 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. Despite limited participation, we almost never keep articles about local branches of this sort. A7 might have done it.  DGG ( talk ) 00:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

JCI Ralston

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:BRANCH criteria for a separate article: Local town chapter of the Jaycees; no significant independent coverage found, just rehashes of the organization's own output. Closeapple (talk) 22:56, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. 23:28, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. 23:28, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. 23:28, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per own nomination: Based on what little coverage exists on the web, it appears that the vast majority is just republished JCI Ralston press information about local events. As an example of not being able to get any independent depth of coverage: The article (which contains no sources) claims that Ralston somehow "restructured" to become part of JCI instead of the U.S. Jaycees, but I can't find it even when I search for it, and the Ralston website doesn't even address it and shows either or both logos arbitrarily on the website.  No sources, so no verified claims to merge to any other article. --Closeapple (talk) 23:28, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Struck duplicate vote by nominator, put the entirety of your rationale in the nomination statement. You can comment, though. Esquivalience  t 23:56, 22 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Most of the article is advertising, and there is no indication that this particular sub-unit of the organisation is notable in it's own right. -- Whpq (talk) 22:56, 26 March 2015 (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.