Talk:Delta Beta Phi/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Deletion
This is a stub article, where Fraternity and Sorority Project participants have been actively encouraged to find additional information, references and detail. Onel5969 opted to place the "Old PROD" template on the page, so it would be deleted within seven days if no one noticed. It thereby would gather no useful public comment or discussion about deletion, merely to be dumped.
We have developed an approach to this notability issue that is written to help assess fraternity articles. There may be 1,400 of them that meet our guidelines of timeframe, multiple chapters, references and quality of article. This is on the Talk page of our project page. This contrasts with the fact that there are probably 6,000 locals (unaffiliated) chapters, many of which we propose are NOT notable. Why? Because they are less than 10 years old. OR do not own property. OR have poor references. Thus we don't want to include all societies that happen to use Greek letters. I find that a comprehensive approach such as this is far better than a scattershot effort to delete occasional pages in more of a capricious way. There are many other areas of Wikipedia that have articles that need attention and deletion, much, much more than those on our watchlist.
The Fraternity and Sorority articles we track on our watchlist may not get seen every week. But that does not make them non-notable. The particular article sought for deletion here is historically interesting and gathering more content. It is interesting for geneology researchers and for those looking up the history of their own, continuing group. Baird's indicates that at least two of the chapters joined other nationals, and may be active today. In a word, this deletion effort was over-zealous.
Since I wrote the original article I found another rich source as a reference for many such groups. After seeing this deletion suggestion I went ahead and added a lot more information to the page which hadn't been available before. I differ with Onel5969 and believe this is notable. Jax MN (talk) 00:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)