Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professional Convention Management Association

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 18:16, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Professional Convention Management Association

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

No evidence provided to indicate that this group meets WP:CORP. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 18:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 19:27, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 19:27, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Please click on this link http://www.pcma.org/attend-learn/industry-calendar#.UdSzVUnD-M8 and it will give you more details about their meetings. Just because they are a small, niche organization, does not warrant their deletion. Chris (talk) 23:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't show coverage in third party sources. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 00:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can not find coverage that gets it past WP:GNG. Not even the recent WSJ mention really tells us anything about the company.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The fact that the association is being mentioned in the Wall Street Journal should be cause for pause, should it not? That counts as 1 towards GNG, in my opinion. This trade association has been around for more than half a century, very strong likelihood not only that sources exist, but that WP should have a page about the group. For the record, HERE'S their official history, which is a self-source for purposes of this notability challenge but which may be mined if anyone wants to expand the piece in a verifiable way (a see a really spammy incarnation in the edit history, that's not what I mean, of course). THIS BIT about the partnership of Sonic Foundry and the PCMA from Madison Wisconsin Living would seem to count towards GNG as a second source. Not sure if Roy C Wood and Bob Brotherton (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Hospitality Management has anything counting towards GNG, but if I were buffing up the page I would run that into further reading. THIS PIECE from Mexico Today does cover the PCMA at some length. They also publish a magazine, which would be gold to a serious historian doing work on the history of the group. Anyway, yeah, passes GNG. Carrite (talk) 16:06, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 11:28, 18 July 2013 (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.