Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nickerson Family 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 keep. Seraphim♥Whipp 14:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nickerson Family Association

Contested prod; non-notable family organization, no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. --Michael White^T·C 12:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weakish Keep - This isn't some fly-by-night geneology club; it was founded over 100 years ago. Sure, many (most) of the hits are announcements of reunions or obituaries, but there are also real news items, such as [1] , [2], and this one, which asserts it is "one of the largest genealogical associations in the world." The article needs cleanup, and it's not clear to me that it will ever be more than a few paragraphs, but I think the subject can be established as notable. Frank | talk 13:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - Needs refs. from other sites to be considered for a Wikipeida article. Limetolime ^{Talk to me} ^• ^{look what I did!} 13:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with both the statements above. In fact, I've wanted to expand this article, but that would take things into COI territory, as I stated on the NFA's talk page. Nickersonl (talk) 14:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you know of neutral, verifiable sources, by all means please add them. COI is not the only factor to keep in mind; it is certainly possible to contribute to an article even if you're a member of the organization. It wouldn't be a good idea to be the ONLY contributor, and if it were your own personal biography that would be different, but if the organization is notable and you can provide links to show that, go for it! Frank | talk 14:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, tag as and see what develops. Gdavid3 (talk) 03:29, 18 June 2008 (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.