Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The ABC Doll Club


 * 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. Shereth 19:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The ABC Doll Club

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This doll collecting club is not notable. The external links are its own website and Facebook; the two references are about expensive dolls but do not mention the club. 40 Ghits, many of which are not about this club. PROD removed by author without comment. JohnCD (talk) 11:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * delete - I can't see any substantial independent coverage, or really any claim for notability. -Hunting dog (talk) 12:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * delete - I would also be somewhat concerned about this article as it is about the webdesign company that is re-designed the website of the page under discussion here. It seems possible that there are conflict of interest issues here too. -- Herby  talk thyme 12:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Sorry, am I supposed to be responding here? I was using the discussion tab. Yes, unfortunately the description from the first reference doesn't contain the club. It is online somewhere and I will have to hunt for it. The second link references it in the actual reference! It refers to us by the acronym, they do have an article there that mentions the club within the page contents. ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 12:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I have just fixed the two links so they DO refer to the club within their content pages. I didn't think that referencing an ebay page would be a good idea and the page will eventually disappear after a while meaning that my link becomes redundant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk • contribs) 12:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable organization with no apparent non-trivial news coverage. --DAJF (talk) 12:46, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Well, if you are adamant on deleting the article. How long do I have to pull things together at least? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk • contribs) 12:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as a non-notable club with quite-evident conflict of interest issues. OBM | blah blah blah 12:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  13:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, can someone please tell me what time/date the article will be deleted so I can save the source? ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 13:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Deletion discussions usually last five days, but may be closed earlier if there is an evident consensus. Even after a page has been deleted, an admin can recover a copy for you on request; but it might be prudent to make a copy for yourself now. Click "edit this page", then click within the text box and click Edit/Select All and then Edit/Copy, and you can paste into Notepad or any word-processor. JohnCD (talk) 13:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you. I'll try my best in the next few days to grab as much valid references as I can! ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 13:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Utterly nn Mayalld (talk) 13:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment In reponse to the number of google hits. The name "ABC Doll Club" was formally "Australian Barbie Club", it had to be changed due to legal issues bought on by the company Mattel. If you do a google search on "Australian Barbie Club" there should be more hits.ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 13:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I've just added a television appearance. There will be more references added in the next few days.ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 14:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Please review page again as I have added more references, hopefully they are more suitable than the earlier refs. ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 16:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hello? Is anyone still around? ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 00:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Can you please tell me how this club is lesser than these examples Climbing_club and Noble_Society_of_Celts. ABCdoll Wikiperson (talk) 03:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I proudly invite anyone to come review this page. It has been greatly improved with references from various national Australian newspapers. Neefie Pawpaw (talk) 07:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. My vote above remains unchanged; I'm simply not convinced that this club meets the relevant notability guidelines. As an aside it may do the author good to read this essay, too. OBM | blah blah blah 09:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. What do you mean??? How do the items that I've cited above be any more suitable? There has been consistent coverage of the club in "reliable, independent secondary sources"

Firstly, the Wikipedia:Notability article

"Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice." It is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance."" - the club is worthy of being noted because it is a national club focusing on something of interest to popular culture. It isn't "famous" and it doesn't cover something important as famine or weapons but then it doesn't have to be to fit as "notable". Have you actually read any of the articles referenced? Some are quite lengthy and detailed. The articles referenced are not "Press releases" and an indepth article spanning multiple print pages would be covering more than just "trivial coverage". This entry is a reference article NOT an advertisment. The club has forums that it can practise those activities within without having to enter such debates as this. The club's "activities are national or international in scale" - they may not be large scale involving large amounts of money or persons, but they do involve individuals from around the whole of Australia and then some from overseas, although to a lesser extent. The club is NOT an "Individual chapter", it is THE WHOLE club. The activities are NOT just "local in scope".

"organization’s longevity, size of membership, or major achievements, or other factors specific to the organization may be considered" - the club has been in existence for almost two decades, at the largest it consisted of 350 members. The club is not commercial and does not provide or charge for any products or services so the following paragraphs do not apply. The journalists who have written about the club are NOT of the club. I have copies of the articles if you are unable to find the articles yourself. I believe I have reached the end of that page.

Secondly, the Wikipedia:Other stuff

"point to similarities" - please do. As you might have noticed, the categories I've added aren't even listed on Wikipedia yet. And they're not vague unknown categories either. The reason why I have created this article is "articles do not exist that probably should" - believe me, I have searched for a more comprehensive article on the collection of dolls and any collectives that might be involved in organising any club or society for such activities. Ok, so I've finished that paragraph on comparisons.

Besides thinking that Star Wars is awesome, I can't find anything to comment on in the next section.

"articles of a similar nature and construct" - please refer to the pages that I have cited in my previous response.

If you really really believe that this topic has no notability, can you at least direct me to a "conglomerate page" of a suitable topic where I can be somewhat of use. Because I haven't found any myself yet - there probably is but I don't live on Wikipedia 24/7 (yet).

And I can't find anything myself in the following section.

Please do not insinuate that I am making up a fairy tale or that I am ignoring guidelines. I admit that I am unexperienced as and editor in Wikipedia, but I have tried my best to follow most directions (except that PROD thing referred to up the top, I must have done something silly when I was really new and didn't know what that was) and I have read your recommended articles and I feel that this article complies to the guidelines set out. 144.138.141.187 (talk) 11:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Neefie Pawpaw (talk) 11:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok then. Firstly, I would appreciate it if you could link to the new sources on the page, rather than give article titles and pointing towards newsbank.com. I'm not sure if I'm alone in my thoughts but having to search for a purported source rather than have it easily accessible is not ideal. Secondly, I don't feel like the notability of this club is asserted enough. As the guidline says: "The organization’s longevity, size of membership, or major achievements, or other factors specific to the organization may be considered"... I'm not seeing such information in the article. Thirdly, my reference to the other stuff essay was in reponse to your comment above that X and Y clubs exist. This is not a good argument, so I was pointing you towards that essay to demonstrate this. Apologies if I should have been more specific in my comment. Fourthly and finally I think you might want to look at this part of the Ownership of Articles policy. It is primarily about other people editing articles that you have created, but I think the final line speaks volumes in this case. I believe the conflict of interest evident in this article may be hindering your attempts to contribute effectively to Wikipedia. The conflict of interest guidline (specifically the part about avoiding them) may be of use. And I can't apologise enough for throwing policies and guidelines at you, but you may be able to better understand the deletion process once you become more familiar with them. Thanks OBM | blah blah blah 12:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. You know what? I give up. You all seem to be adamant on deleting this article without even helping me to try to move it into a more acceptable status. Delete it. Dance your victory dance. I don't care anymore :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neefie Pawpaw (talk • contribs) 12:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   —Longhair\talk 06:35, 29 June 2008 (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.