Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T.S. Illustrious SCC

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. — Aitias // discussion 00:28, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

T.S. Illustrious SCC

Individual local groups such as this or a boy scout troop fall below our notability threshold. Sgroupace (talk) 13:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. There's a long standing convention that individual cadet, scout, guide, etc units aren't notable and this doesn't seem to be an exception. Nick-D (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —Nick-D (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: If I may expand upon what Nick is saying (and I think he'll agree with me here), is "what makes this unit stand out from all the other units?". Good article though, just doesn't meet our inclusion criteria unfortunately. From a former Sea Cadet Ryan4314 (talk) 14:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC) ;)[reply]

I thought as we had won the best unit in Essex and London, that stands us apart from others :(

Took ages to write aswell ... PLEASE leave it on :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.215.55.74 (talk) 19:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, simply being the best sea cadet group in the region is not sufficient to pass Wikipedia's notability inclusion guidelines. Also, the information in the article has to meet Wikipedia:Verifiability, by being sourced from publications such as regional/national-level newspapers or books. Have you considered adding this information to your traning ship's website instead, or creating a page at one of the numerous free-hosting websites on the internet? -- saberwyn 21:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could userfy it to save all your hard work, although I don't know if that will be allowed as no individual unit will ever meet the notability criteria just on the basis of "being a unit". If you wanted to use the content for a free website you intend to host, then I strongly recommend going back to the article and "copying" all the text and pasting it into a wordpad file on your computer before it's deleted. Ryan4314 (talk) 00:37, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per WP:ORG, individual chapters of an organisation are not normally notable. There is nothing that really disinguishes this unit from the others, and the awards from within the organisation are not sufficient to establish this notability -- Whpq (talk) 18:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I have to say delete as well. However, to the author, Nick D and I are admins and can retrieve the content for you should you not have it, after it's deleted. Buckshot06(prof) 14:45, 27 February 2009 (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.