Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stella Nova


 * 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. North America1000 16:41, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Stella Nova

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A group that appears to fails both the WP:GNG and WP:NORG. There are no sources currently being utilized in the article. I searched for additional sources, both under its current name and its original name, and essentially found nothing in reliable, secondary sources. Its only claim to notability in the article is that several of its ex-members went on to do notable things themselves, but notability is not inherited, so that does not contribute to notability of the group. It survived a prior AFD way back in 2006, but the argument for Keep was largely based on Google hits, which is not a valid rationale for notability. Rorshacma (talk) 22:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Rorshacma (talk) 22:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Rorshacma (talk) 22:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Note to closer for soft deletion: While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it was [ previously undeleted (May 15, 2007)]. --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Related discussions:
 * Logs: ,

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * a restored speedy deletion does not prevent SOFTDELETE. However I took your comment to be an objection to such an action so I relisted. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reporting. --Kanashimi (talk) 09:15, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   05:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Article topic lacks significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) It had no meaningful hits in Google Books and News searches despite being a contemporaneous org associated with the English language. There are no worthwhile redirect targets. If someone finds more (non-English and offline) sources, please ping me. re: soft deletion above, started a discussion at WP:PROD but it wouldn't be eligible either way because the subject had a prior AfD (albeit under a former name). czar  04:49, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete- This is a badly sourced article about a non-notable club. The sources that it does have are primary, or tangential. Reyk YO! 08:27, 18 April 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.