Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Student Society (AAU)


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 15:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

The Student Society (AAU)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Previous Prod with rationale "Lack of evidence in reliable 3rd party sources that this organisation is notable." Prod was removed by article creator without comment. This was after adding a reference to the Danish Wikipedia page - but Wikipedia is not a Reliable Source. So bringing this to AfD on the same rationale as the Prod. AllyD (talk) 17:59, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm finding some mentions when searching for the Danish word "Studentersamfundet", but I'm not really sure that it's enough to show notability. I found where the group was mentioned in an article in relation to an orgy and about what I think is a student election, but not much else.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Merge with Aalborg University. Redirect to Aalborg_University. Most of the article is primarily a list of courses or cafés are in the group, and those can be thrown out. But the subject could be notable, but not notable enough. Mention it in a section at Aalborg University and should be reasonable. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 21:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note that there is already a mention of this student organisation at Aalborg_University.--Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:56, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 03:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete appears to be already mentioned where it should be, and a redirect of this title would be near useless. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  04:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I too am of the opinion that there is no encyclopedic material, no reason to think they're notable, and no need for a redirect from this nondistinctive title.  DGG ( talk ) 05:05, 6 March 2012 (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.