Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Technical Committee on Visualization and Graphics


 * 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 merge to IEEE Computer Society. (non-admin closure) Naypta ☺ &#124; ✉ talk page &#124; 20:26, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Technical Committee on Visualization and Graphics

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

What makes this committee pass WP:NORG? Ping who PRODDED it (only for the prod to be removed with no rationale by another editor). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:05, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:40, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep/merge The IEEE is a large and respectable professional body.  The worst case for this topic would be merger to a page such as IEEE_Computer_Society per WP:ATD-M.  Deletion is therefore not appropriate and the rest is a matter of ordinary editing per WP:NOTCLEANUP. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:ITSIMPORTANT is not a particularly good article. Important according to whom? Committees are rarely notable and the sourcing here proves this - nobody discusses the body outside IEEE. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 00:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:48, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge Similar situation to Articles for deletion/Technical Committee on VLSI. There is no dispute at all that the IEEE is notable, and even it's societies are notable, but individual committees under them less so. The sources look to be mostly primary. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:10, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I too don't think we can create this article without depending on a lot of primary sources, thus it should be merged. Santosh L (talk) 06:21, 20 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.