Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greater Cincinnati Aquarium 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 delete. JForget 01:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Cincinnati Aquarium Society

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

A challenged speedy deletion of mine. I do not think the references show any real claim to notability; they show only that you are members of a group of local societies with essentially open membership, that a representative was interviewed on a a local news program once, and that some of the members succeed in breeding rare fish. Local hobbyist societies of this sort are excellent things, and contribute to public interest in science, but they are almost never individually notable. DGG ( talk ) 20:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In my view not an A7 candidate - a number of credible claims to importance - but certainly lacks significant coverage in reliable sources, which is our accepted notability standard. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding to my request to look at the notability of this article. Considering your response, I feel it is indeed appropriate that the organization is not "notable" as within Wikipedia standards. While, I do not necessarily agree with these standards, I respect Wikipedia's right to enforce them. I would like to thank you however for taking the time to respond to my request to reconsider, however I now understand why it does not meet the guidelines put forth by Wikipedia. Would the national organization FAAS (Federation of American Aquarium Societies) meet Wikipedia's notability standards, I believe it does since it has influenced exotic pet species laws, and has had other influence of national importance, but I would like to know your opinion before I create an article for it. --Theexiledmagi (talk) 22:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is à priori more likely to be notable than the city chapter. However, the vast majority of Gsearch results seem to be directory entries, or referrals from the city/regional organisations. It would be helpful if you could cite articles where it is clearly credited for the accomplishments you mentioned. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 23:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it appears to absolutely fail WP:ORG. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 23:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete However, in answer to the question posed by Theexiledmagi, I think that the Federation of American Aquarium Societies would probably be able to establish notability, in that it is a national organization with affiliated regional societies, and (perhaps) the only national society for the hobby. I'd note that this has nothing to do with the Newport Aquarium which would be in the Greater Cincinnati area, but rather about persons in the area who are serious about aquaria in their homes. Mandsford (talk) 14:43, 2 May 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.