Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenosha Yacht Club


 * 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. Tone 15:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Kenosha Yacht Club

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Disputed PROD. Non-notable yacht club, fails WP:CLUB and WP:GNG. Existing references are all self-references to club's website. Ghits show no non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. ukexpat (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  -- ukexpat (talk) 19:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions.  -- ukexpat (talk) 19:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of references in Books and newspapers. Colonel Warden (talk) 01:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please cite some. – ukexpat (talk) 02:07, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom; ads the Colonel, sorry. I found zero news Ghits, and what's left online is primarily Facebook, local directories, mirror sites, and travel/touriasm sites.  It may be notable locally, hence the sheer number of Ghits, but not ntationally.  There was one lawsuit where the club was a defendant, but that was dismissed and has little precedential value. Bearian (talk) 19:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Added some references. Cleaned up some of the promotional language.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwinmontano (talk • contribs) 19:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Only the Sail magazine article counts - the others are self references or directory-type listings. Notability requires non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources; one source isn't sufficient. – ukexpat (talk) 21:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:20, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability. User:Edwinmontano should also mention his conflict of interest here. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete per the convincing analysis of the sources undertaken by ukexpat and Bearian. The sources fall well below the standard required for a reliable article, namely significant coverage in reliable sources. --Mkativerata (talk) 04:54, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, per ukexpat and Bearian --Nuujinn (talk) 15:56, 2 April 2010 (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.