Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Townsville Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Centre


 * 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 keep. There is clear evidence given by the contributors to this discussion that this article is clearly notable. (non-admin closure) Thine Antique Pen (talk) 20:52, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Townsville Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Centre

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG. 2 gnews hits. limited coverage in trove. coverage mainly confirms its helds some events, but nothing indepth to put it above any other cultural centre on WP. LibStar (talk) 07:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Did you check archives of the Townsville Bulletin before making this nomination? The centre has received significant coverage. Aside from the several references to this newspaper already in the article, I found, and   from a quick search of its not-very-good website, and I'm sure that lots more stories are available in its archives. ABC News has also covered this centre , . As such, I think that WP:ORG is met. Nick-D (talk) 02:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * re the first three, Passing mentions in mostly unrelated articles are not significant coverage. The two ABC bits are the best there is yet shown but they are just routine announcements. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:33, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:33, 29 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Centre appears to be established, recognised by its community and received coverage by reliable sources. - Shiftchange (talk) 12:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable enough for national (Australian) coverage. Bearian (talk) 18:46, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient coverage to show that it is a notable cultural institution.  --Arxiloxos (talk) 19:04, 4 October 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.