Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norway Model United Nations Society

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was MERGE

Norway Model United Nations Society

 *  Del  merge. Non-notable student organisation with big words in the name. All web references say mostly that it exists, but I see nothing notable even at their own webpage (besides the name). Mikkalai 22:56, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge into Model United Nations or keep. If there is a problem here, it is that Wikipedia is missing similar information for the rest of the national MUN organizations. iMeowbot~Mw 00:24, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, these groups are nn. Wyss 01:32, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: promo. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:37, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge into Model United Nations or keep--Is Mise le Méas, Irishpunktom 10:50, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nn is a ni.  &#8227; &#5339;&#5505;  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|&#9792;]] &#5200; 11:43, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge to Model United Nations or keep. Do not delete.  GRider\talk 18:52, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge into Model United Nations or keep, as with GRider. James F. (talk) 20:11, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Actually, the "MUN" article is already large. Looking at its backlinks, IMO two more sub-articles are required: Regional Model United Nations societies and Model United Nations activities. I suggest the zealots of Andre Nilsen to do some useful and really uniting work in place of vigorous self-promoting. Mikkalai 22:13, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is no point in merging everything into one long article. This organization is certainly notable in Norway and has done a lot of great work. Cheers, Erik
 * Anon vote.


 * Delete or merge. Odd choice for the AIW. &mdash;Ben Brockert (42) 07:39, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well written, verifiable, not vanity, Wikipedia isn't paper.  This is a legitimate part of human knowledge.  Dbenbenn 07:42, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Well written? Are you kidding?
 * "Its purpose is to enhance the knowledge and understanding of Norwegian foreign policy" Whose knowledge and understanding? Finns?
 * "is an organizer of delegations to Model United Nations" Of unemployed, of members of ting?
 * Well English language, but absolutely hollow article, written either brainlessly or in a deliberately misleading way, to make the thingy bigger than it is. Given that these kids are smart, I vote for the second option. Future politicians, practicing in propaganda.First versions of the other Andre Nilsen matter or pride, Oxford Council on Good Governance, were written in such way that as if they personally "handed"(!) their advices to Kofi Annan. I will keep an eye on it and see what happens with it next year. I hate braggards with all my guts.Mikkalai 08:11, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Representatives of the Oxford Council on Good Governance have indeed handed advice documents in person to people like Kofi Annan and Tony Blair. This is a fact, so please do not let your hate and other emotions cloud your fairness and judgement. Charlotte
 * This "fact" was deleted from the article by your bunch, not by me. I don't see any mentions of these highly notable events on the CSGG website. I will gladly restore it and will fervently vote for the restoring of the Andre Nilsen page, if you show me the evidence that the guys like KA & TB take OCGG seriously. Mikkalai 20:18, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what 'your bunch' refers to. People and organizations giving advice to policy-makers at that level do not necessarily want to make it public all the time. Charlotte
 * Keep. Give it a bit of an expand/cleanup, and it could be quite a nice article. Ambi 08:24, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * If there is something to expand, why don't they do this? There was plenty of struggle around this Nilsen guy last couple of months. Instead of proving notability they keep on trolling. Mikkalai 08:31, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Charlotte
 * Anon votes are not useful on VfD. &mdash;Ben Brockert (42) 18:14, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.