Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southside Composite Squadron


 * 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. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Southside Composite Squadron

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This individual CAP squadron does not appear to meet WP:GNG. While there are Wikipedia articles on State Wings of the CAP, I don't think a single squadron inherently qualifies as notable. There does not appear to be any history or events associated with this squadron that would confer notability. Delete. Safiel (talk) 22:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I would agree that civil air patrol squadrons do not qualify as inherently notable. That being said, the author states in one edit summary that "there will more information on this page within the week", so we will see if sources are brought forward that can establish some other form of notability, though there's not much reliable third-party references that I could find online. Cheers, CharlieEchoTango (talk) 05:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - No independent third party references to show notability, so it fails WP:N and WP:GNG. The editor who started the article has his requested week to improve the article while this AFD runs its course. - Ahunt (talk) 12:28, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete; appears to fail the GNG. bobrayner (talk) 12:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - This articles was just created on 17 November 2011 so I think we should ask the author about it before we just arbitrarily delete it. I do think that in its current state it does not meet the criteria of GNG and probably won't. --Kumioko (talk) 14:17, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - The article creator has been notified of this discussion and can comment here the same as any other editor. He can also fix up and expand the article over the next week, which will affect the discussion outcome, if that happens. Also it is worth mentioning that it won't be "arbitrarily deleted", it will only be deleted because of a week-long consultation involving everyone who is interested in the article on Wikipedia and then only with community consensus. It is hardly an "arbitrary" process. - Ahunt (talk) 17:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - individual cadet squadrons are not notable except in extraordinary circumstances. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:13, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Should be part of a list of CAP units, not an individual article.Petebutt (talk) 09:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - previous convention is that these types of cadet squadrons are not really notable for individual articles. MilborneOne (talk) 19:34, 24 November 2011 (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.