Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bay Area Science Fiction Association: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:29, 26 February 2011

Bay Area Science Fiction Association

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:ORG, lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources. Google book and news searches on the title bring up zero results. Only claim to notability in the article is a few notable members which does not necessarily transfer to the organization itself. RadioFan (talk) 02:18, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- JN466 02:27, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- JN466 02:27, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am a member of this club (and a former President of it). I've updated a bunch of the references of the article to the organization's own web site so that the complaint that it's unsourced (which was justified) can be removed. As far as references from other sites go, I found more than you might expect. The club's current Hugo Award Recommendations are references from SF AwardsWatch at http://www.sfawardswatch.com/?p=2980. The Hugo-Award winning magazine Emerald City references the club many times, including for instance http://www.emcit.com/emcit074.shtml#Shadow reporting on author Tad Williams' appearance there a few years ago. While the club is no LASFS or NESFA, it is certainly a legitimate fan organization with influence on the SF fan community. Would it make RadioFan happier if the article listed some of the mentions of the club in the article itself? Kevin Standlee (talk) 20:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The references provided in the article are all primary sources, the club's website, which does not help establish notability unfortauntely. Wikipedia's notability guidelines insist on significant coverage in 3rd party reliable sources where the club has been the subject of the article. Passing mentions in the press, such as announcements of events or articles which are primarily about an author and mention the club on briefly also dont help establish notability. As president of the club, you should avoid editing the article as you have a conflict of interest. I left some additional information about this on your talk page.--RadioFan (talk) 22:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 20:19, 26 February 2011 edit Kastandlee (talk \| contribs) 127 edits →‎Bay Area Science Fiction Association: Cited some external references. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:29, 26 February 2011 edit undo MadeYourReadThis (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 97,132 edits →‎Bay Area Science Fiction Association: R Next edit →
Line 9:		Line 9:

	*'''Keep''' I am a member of this club (and a former President of it). I've updated a bunch of the references of the article to the organization's own web site so that the complaint that it's unsourced (which was justified) can be removed. As far as references from other sites go, I found more than you might expect. The club's current Hugo Award Recommendations are references from SF AwardsWatch at http://www.sfawardswatch.com/?p=2980. The Hugo-Award winning magazine [[Emerald City (magazine)\|Emerald City]] references the club many times, including for instance http://www.emcit.com/emcit074.shtml#Shadow reporting on author [[Tad Williams\|Tad Williams']] appearance there a few years ago. While the club is no [[Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society\|LASFS]] or [[New England Science Fiction Association\|NESFA]], it is certainly a legitimate fan organization with influence on the SF fan community. Would it make RadioFan happier if the article listed some of the mentions of the club in the article itself? [[User:Kastandlee\|Kevin Standlee]] ([[User talk:Kastandlee\|talk]]) 20:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' I am a member of this club (and a former President of it). I've updated a bunch of the references of the article to the organization's own web site so that the complaint that it's unsourced (which was justified) can be removed. As far as references from other sites go, I found more than you might expect. The club's current Hugo Award Recommendations are references from SF AwardsWatch at http://www.sfawardswatch.com/?p=2980. The Hugo-Award winning magazine [[Emerald City (magazine)\|Emerald City]] references the club many times, including for instance http://www.emcit.com/emcit074.shtml#Shadow reporting on author [[Tad Williams\|Tad Williams']] appearance there a few years ago. While the club is no [[Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society\|LASFS]] or [[New England Science Fiction Association\|NESFA]], it is certainly a legitimate fan organization with influence on the SF fan community. Would it make RadioFan happier if the article listed some of the mentions of the club in the article itself? [[User:Kastandlee\|Kevin Standlee]] ([[User talk:Kastandlee\|talk]]) 20:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
			:'''Comment''' The references provided in the article are all [[WP:PS\|primary sources]], the club's website, which does not help establish notability unfortauntely. Wikipedia's [[WP:ORG\|notability guidelines]] insist on ''significant'' coverage in [[WP:RS\|3rd party reliable sources]] where the club has been the subject of the article. Passing mentions in the press, such as announcements of events or articles which are primarily about an author and mention the club on briefly also dont help establish notability. As president of the club, you should avoid editing the article as you have a [[WP:COI\|conflict of interest]]. I left some additional information about this on your talk page.--[[User:RadioFan\|RadioFan]] ([[User talk:RadioFan\|talk]]) 22:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC)