Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Golden State Peace Officers Association

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. A Train^talk 09:04, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Golden State Peace Officers Association

Golden State Peace Officers Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Delete. Article about an organization with no particularly strong claim to passing WP:ORG. The only notability claimed here is that one newspaper article once reported the number of attendees at their convention in the same article as they stated that the organization doesn't release its membership numbers -- which, until I poleaxed it for WP:NPOV compliance, was being editorialized as a special nadir in "the history of gay journalism". (However, since the article didn't give any of their names, and thus didn't individually out anyone, this complaint is just a meaningless bit of white noise and not any sort of serious ethical breach of the type that might be historically noteworthy.) And the only source present here is that exact news article, rather than any independent analysis of its "nadirness" -- so there's no strong claim to passing WP:GNG either. I'm certainly willing to withdraw this if somebody can write and source something much more substantial than an editorial commentary on one utterly inconsequential bit of trivia, but nothing here right now is enough in and of itself to make this a suitable topic for an encyclopedia article. Bearcat (talk) 03:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:55, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:55, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:55, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:55, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

• Weak delete for now - yeah, this sounds like it could be notable, but it needs sources and right now I don't think there's enough for a whole article here. That's the thing with little "associations" and "community groups", they can often not last long and close when the original participants lose interests or move and they often seem to fade away without any specific source saying when they closed. This website implies it's defunct. Content might easily be movable to any one of many articles on the gay community or policing in California, so just to be clear to the page creator I am not suggesting that this content should not be on Wikipedia in any form, just not as a whole article. (The topic is already briefly discussed in the White Night riots article, in fact.) Blythwood (talk) 16:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 16:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:51, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

• Delete -- does not pass WP:NORG and sources are not sufficient to meet GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:13, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

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.