Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeta Tau Chapter of Beta Theta Pi
- 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, reasons to delete - lack of verifiability, original research, lack of notability. Reasons to keep - I like it. Proto::► 15:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Zeta Tau Chapter of Beta Theta Pi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Non-notable local chapter of a national fraternity. This would be roughly the equivalent of an article on a lodge of Elks or a Chamber of commerce. It is well sourced, but every source is from the local chapter, national organization, and one minor one from the college. There are no independent, reliable sources offered to establish notability of this organization. A redirect to the national organization's article was tried several weeks ago but quickly reverted. Metros232 14:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Wikipedia is not a free webhost. --Fang Aili talk 14:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - other chapters for this fraternity and other fraternities exist. This would factor my nomination to keep this article. Another good reason is that fraternities sometimes fold. As an encyclopedia we might the final source. I am not a member of this fraternity. Decision changed with =Ronbo76 00:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- If these other chapters fail to assert notability, I contend that they should be deleted as well. --Fang Aili talk 01:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Currently the other two chapters from this fraternity (as far as I can tell) are up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delta Theta Chapter of Beta Theta Pi. Metros232 02:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:ORG (proposed guideline). As for "other chapters exist", inclusion does not demonstrate notability. --Dhartung | Talk 06:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Beta Theta Pi. Not notable as far as I can tell. delldot | talk 21:30, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep. Certainly notable and well-researched. And why have images been prematurely deleted from the site when this vote has not concluded? Pat 21:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment well what is the notability of it? It won a bunch of awards on the campus and within the frat, that's about it, right? Also, do you have independent sources (i.e. ones not from the frat itself) to confer this notability? Metros232 22:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- And according to the deletion log, it was deleted as lacking a copyright status [1]. Several weeks ago the copyright tag for almost all coat of arms images was deleted, rendering the images as being without copyright status and, therefore, subject to deletion after a week. Metros232 22:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I find the timing of this quite offensive, not only because the image was properly uploaded, but this particular attempt to delete this article comes on the heels of an attempted deletion of this article without feedback, fended off not two weeks ago. If this article does get deleted, it will have been the end of one of the most undemocratic series of dealings that I have seen since I've been here. Also, "notability" is a guideline subject to Wikipedia's larger objectives which has always been used broadly for the sake of making this (more or less) a site to memorialize dead kings and record fictional characters. This organization is notable, but it does not have to be. Pat 04:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I could write a tremendous, feature article quality article on myself using sources and making it totally verifiable. Would that article stay? No, because I'm not notable. Where are the independent, verifiable sources on this? Do you have any sources that address the subject that aren't from the frat or the school? 6 of the sources are from the national fraternity, 1 from the school, 1 from the chapter, 1 from another chapter, and 1 that's not a reference, just a note. Metros232 14:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I find the timing of this quite offensive, not only because the image was properly uploaded, but this particular attempt to delete this article comes on the heels of an attempted deletion of this article without feedback, fended off not two weeks ago. If this article does get deleted, it will have been the end of one of the most undemocratic series of dealings that I have seen since I've been here. Also, "notability" is a guideline subject to Wikipedia's larger objectives which has always been used broadly for the sake of making this (more or less) a site to memorialize dead kings and record fictional characters. This organization is notable, but it does not have to be. Pat 04:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete and delete all local chapters of fraternities etc unless there is somethingthat is or was particularly notable or newsworthy. I see no justification whatsoever. The argument that we need to keep it as an instorical record is invalid, because everything that has ever been in wikipedia is part of the historical record as long as web-based civilization survives (smile)DGG 04:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=&page=Image%3AP1010306.JPG){kind=link}
- 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.