Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phi Society

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 redirect to Phi Delta Theta#Concern and criticism. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phi Society

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

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable single chapter college club. No national fraternity affiliations. No third party sources to establish notability, as required by WP:N. No sources at all, in fact, just links to the club website. It is comprised of a single chapter. Fails all WP:ORG alternate notability standards. Only exists on 1 college campus. Awarding the "Horny Korny Award" to the member who is "not successful with dating" is insufficient to demonstrate notability. Oh yeah, there's only 1 chapter in the whole world. GrapedApe (talk) 12:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete - Fails WP:ORG, WP:N, and possibly even WP:Promotion Overall, I see no reason to keep. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 18:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the appropriate section of Phi Delta Theta , where it is mentioned as one of the two chapters that split because they refused to adopt a no-alcohol policy. DGG ( talk ) 06:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.