Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SamCERA

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. JohnCD (talk) 20:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SamCERA

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

The article is about an Employee's Retirement Association. Most of it seems to be targeted at members or potential members of the association, and I don't think that bringing it into line with Wikipedia's style guidelines would be helpful, since it doesn't appear to be a notable organisation per WP:ORG. Handschuh-^{talk to me} 10:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update The article has previously been prodded and deleted, but was restored by User:Spartaz after an undeletion request. Handschuh-^{talk to me} 10:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm not surprised it was previously prodded; the article is a complete mess and while it contains a lot of information, it barely has any real content to accompany it. Fails WP:ORG, has no references or citations, and only two links independent of the organisation. KaySL (talk) 13:43, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:11, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, long and unencyclopedic article about a non-notable county-level body. This is all information that belongs on the group's website. Glenfarclas (talk) 18:40, 4 January 2010 (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.