Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wabigama


 * 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. Wizardman 14:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Wabigama

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

Non-notable club; no citations found; wikilinks are to other articles created today --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 16:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment A Google News search (for Wabigama club) returned 4 hits - only 2 of which seem to be about this particular club, and they are both for an obit for the same member, which mentions he was a member. A Google web search for the same term returned 46 hits, none of which seem to be from sites which would be suitable for citations. A PROD was issued on the page, but this (along with the unref and notability tags) were removed by the creator when he wikilinked 3 of the members to new articles he had just created. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 16:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- ( X!  ·  talk )  · @740  · 16:45, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions.  —--  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me,  My Contribs ) 17:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * delete - A Google Books does a bit better, but I am not seeing anythign sufficient to establish notability for this club. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Just because a bunch of notable doctors and engineers founded Wabigama, it does not make the club itself notable. Fails WP:NOTE. I believe that notability should be the first thing to establish upon the creation of this article. Notability is not something an article develops through the weeks and months of the article's life. We should not be allowing articles to live in order to give it a chance to prove itself. Groink (talk) 09:46, 21 August 2009 (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.