Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leonardo, the International Society for the Arts, Sciences and Technology


 * 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 no consensus. In closing this, I have counted 's remark as almost a "delete" !vote, even though they didn't formally !vote. NOTINHERITED is a strong argument here, but clearly dosn't sway all participants to the debate. Now this AfD is closed, I hope that the information in the different articles will be reorganized along the lines suggested by. Randykitty (talk) 11:37, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Leonardo, the International Society for the Arts, Sciences and Technology

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Slightly promotional page for an organization that publishes several journals in the field of electronic media. While the journals it publishes are notable (many have their own Wikipedia page), the umbrella organization that publishes them is not notable by inheritance. The sources provided have no depth whatsoever, and consist of fact checks rather than independent in-depth coverage. Notability fail. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:44, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Sheldybett (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The article Leonardo (journal) is actually more about the organisation than the journal. The organisation, not the journal is the publisher, so if the journal is notable so is the publisher. Rathfelder (talk) 08:08, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * that's not logical. "If X is notable, then so is Y" is a fallacy here on Wikipedia. Notability is not inherited.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 09:40, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:50, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep, if your journals are notable, you are a notable publisher. A good chunk of Leonardo (journal) should be located at this article rather than at the journal article however. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:27, 28 January 2019 (UTC)


 * No. If your journals are notable, you are a publisher of notable journals. And, you can be a notable publisher of non-notable journals! Emeraude (talk) 09:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, but you can also be a publisher of notable journals. There are many paths to notability. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:31, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTINHERITED Says "Similarly, parent notability should be established independently; notability is not inherited "up", from notable subordinate to parent, either: not every manufacturer of a notable product is itself notable; not every organization to which a notable person belongs (or which a notable person leads) is itself notable. For example, just because Albert Einstein was a founding member of a particular local union of the American Federation of Teachers [Local 552, Princeton Federation of Teachers] does not make that AFT local notable." Read literally, Leonardo ISAST should be assessed independently of its journals.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The primary activity of Leonardo ISAST is it's journals. That's like saying a scientist should be assessed independently of their research or contribution to science. People inherit the notability of their works, just like publishers inherit the notability of their journals and conferences. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Not the same thing-- a journal is notable because of the quality authors who publish in it, not because of its publisher. There is basically no in-depth coverage of ISAST itself, and this page was obviously created to promote it. The in-depth coverage and notability lies in the journals, and we have articles on the journals in any case. If I go with your argument, then anyone who owns a couple of notable journals is notable... which is not a desired outcome here. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 08:29, 30 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Likewise, a publisher is notable for the quality of its journals. I don't see a problem with that. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 08:31, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, if you want to ignore NOTINHERITED, you can also say the unknown person who owns the publishing company is also notable.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 08:36, 30 January 2019 (UTC)


 * To a point, but mere ownership of a company is a rather different than a publisher publishing of journals. I'll also point out that we have articles on both Roger Malina and Frank Malina. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 08:55, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Except the Mailinas are very well known for the independent contributions to the field of art and technology, and I can find source after source after source about them that establishes their notability. Not true of ISAST.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. StrayBolt (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: in my view, a organization which publishes multiple notable journals is on that grounds notable. Notability is not inherited, yes; but, it is a cumulative effect. If it only published one notable journal, it would not have independent notability. But an organization which publishes four notable journals, I would say that should be enough for its own notability. Likewise, the fact that some of the individuals involved (its founder and some of its editors/chairs) are notable, by itself doesn't confer notability, but cumulatively adds to it. In other words, I don't think NOTINHERITED is an absolute rule; if you inherit enough notability from enough different sources, then notability can be inherited after all. SJK (talk) 11:02, 5 February 2019 (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.