Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minnesota Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn after article improvement. MelanieN (talk) 19:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Minnesota Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a minor administrative unit in the state government of Minnesota, not notable enough for an article of its own. It has recently received a few mentions (nothing more) in news stories, but absolutely no substantive reporting about the board itself. This is demonstrated by the references, which consist of one link to the board’s own website and 6 news stories that mention the name of the organization. MelanieN (talk) 14:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. MelanieN (talk) 14:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MelanieN (talk) 14:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. MelanieN (talk) 14:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


 * WP:BEFORE recommends those nominating articles consider the underlying notability of article's underlying topic. Complying with BEFORE requires nominator to perform their own web searches. If the underlying topic of an article measures up to our notability criteria, but the contributor considering making a nomination for deletion, has concerns over the current state of the article, they are supposed to raise their concerns on the article's talk page, or other fora, or place editorial tags, or contact those working on the article.  When the underlying topic of an article meets our inclusion criteria, deletion is supposed to be reserved for a last resort, when good faith attempts to improve the article have failed.
 * I've started working on an essay offering guidance about how to comply with BEFORE. It is a work in progress, but I'll link to it, in its incomplete state - User:Geo Swan/opinions/When complying with BEFORE is not straighforward
 * Since the AFD was placed I added eight new references, and expanded the article. Geo Swan (talk) 23:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Disclaimer, I started this article.  Nomination states the organization is "not notable enough for an article of its own", even though (1) it has the Board has the serious responsibilities of setting the curriculum, and supervising the training of all Police officers, in Minnesota; and it (2) has the serious responsibilities of issuing and revoking the licenses to serve as Police officer. In addition (3) it was the first Board of its type in the USA.  Nomination incorrectly claims there is "absolutely no substantive reporting about the board itself."  The October 2017 Star Tribune four part investigative report into Policing in Minnesota is hundred paragraphs long, and approximately half of those paragraphs deal with the Board.  Then, since it was the first such Board in the USA, there is substantial scholarly coverage - the two scholarly articles I added being just scratching the surface.  Geo Swan (talk) 15:37, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. This board appears to meet GNG at face value and the work that Geo Swan has done since this nomination proves there are sufficient sources to build a Wikipedia quality article.--Mpen320 (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Withdraw nomination I’m withdrawing the nomination. Most of the references are still just mentions, but reference #3 (the Star Tribune article) and #16 (an actual analysis) are probably enough to meet the notability standard. (Incidentally, neither of those references turns up in a normal Google search; Geo Swan is to be commended for the thoroughness of his searching.) -- MelanieN (talk) 20:07, 3 July 2020 (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.