Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of the Bull's Blood (2nd nomination)

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 keep. Consensus in this discussion is for the article to be retained, and that source availability and depth of coverage is sufficient regarding the topic's notability. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000^(talk) 04:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Order of the Bull's Blood

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

Does not seem notable. Sources from Daily Princetonian and Rutgers Centurion and Youtube do not indicate notability to be. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 17:35, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Articles from New York Times, The Week, and New York Observer do indicate notability. Since the Daily Princetonian has been printed since 1876, and is affiliated with Associated Press and wins prestigious awards for its writing, it would qualify as a reliable source. Hierophant443 (talk) 17:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

and U.S. News & World Report [1], and dartblog (Dartmouth) [2]

Redirect per previous AFD consensus. Giant Snowman 17:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Redirect to Rutgers University student organizations. Articles from The Princetonian are not really independent of the subject matter here, as the relevant content involves the rivalry between the two schools. Coverage of this rivalry, for all we know, may be just a form of promoting it, and indirectly, its own school. Otherwise, the two sentences in the NYTimes article the five sentences in the Mental Floss article and otherwise are not exactly impressive coverage. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 18:45, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The scope and breadth of references in independent, reliable and verifiable sources about the club establish notability. Hopefully the additional exposure will lead to some improvements to the article, especially in terms of formatting of the references already in the article. Alansohn (talk) 20:28, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:N, WP:RS, doesn't meet any of the criteria at WP:DEL-REASON. --ColonelHenry (talk) 03:59, 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, L Faraone 00:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I cleaned up the article's references, and made some modifications to the structure of the article. That being said, WP:ORGDEPTH states that "a company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. ...Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability." This organization has been profiled in the New York Times, New York Observer, and The Week, thus easily meeting the above notability requirement. DavidinNJ (talk) 20:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per arguments by David; striking my support for redirect above. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 20:57, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems to meet notability requirements. 069952497a (U-T-C-E) 00:46, 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.