Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monterey County Skeptics

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 no consensus. Kurykh (talk) 21:28, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Monterey County Skeptics (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)

Apparently promotional article for a Local organization. (or perhaps one of its members) Perhaps a brief article on Skepticamp might be justified. The promotional nature of this article is shown by the excessive number of photos of individuals DGG ( talk ) 01:02, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DGG, I'm sorry to read you find the article 'promotional'. Any Wiki page is meant for informational, educational purposes only. If the number of photos is excessive, we can remove some of those; I'll look into that now. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Better now? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:32, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:32, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:32, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (de-photo-ing certainly was a good idea) Cited coverage heavily skewed to local but still sufficient, I think. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:39, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete instead as the information is too listing-esque and the sources only announcements and mentions, it's not overall substantial. SwisterTwister talk 09:13, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I just added reference to this page for an article published in what I understand is a national publication and a WP:RS.It discusses this organization and the importance of public outreach meetings such as the one held by MCS. Hope this helps. RobP (talk) 19:38, 11 February 2017 (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.