Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Institute for Discovery Science


 * 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.  bibliomaniac 1 5  BUY NOW! 22:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

National Institute for Discovery Science
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable organisation outside of crank ufo circles. Propose for deletion under WP:Corp Jefffire 10:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I've just spent some time adding a few references found via Google including 1 from a local television station, 1 from a local newspaper and one from space.com. I think these should establish notability via WP:RS standards. FWIW, I'm not into the whole UFO thing but saw this listed and thought I'd check it out.  Jody B   talk 13:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Of these, only the space.com seems notable, and that's not really about the organisation. Personally I think it takes more than a single article like that to establish the actual organisation's notability, but it is on the right track to establish notability. Jefffire 15:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The space.com article is almost entirely about the orgnization's research, which conclusions are outside the usual "crank-UFO" reports. Deseret News is a major newspaper located in Salt Lake City and Channel 8 is a local broadcast news organization. Each of these are secondary sources with editorial oversight and each reported within contexts with which they have expertise, thus bring these three into full compliance with WP:V. Perhaps take another look. Anyway, I'll not belabor the point further. Thanks.  Jody B   talk 20:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, plenty of Google Scholar and Books results.


 * Keep I have to agree with JodyB. Lorangriel 18:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 05:09, 5 July 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.