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--Ymblanter (talk) 06:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Honorsociety.org[edit]

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

Does not appear to meet WP:CORP. Article is built almost entirely around first-party source. "HonorSociety.org" gets zero Gnews hits, Alexa says few inbound links. Their FAQ page is an explicit music video, which doesn't exactly encourage me to take their words for things. Nat Gertler (talk) 06:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:15, 9 April 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, Mediran (t • c) 00:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:ORG, G-searches turn up largely trivial sources. hmssolent\^{Let's convene} _{My patrols} 05:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. hmssolent\^{Let's convene} _{My patrols} 14:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Delete The article has multiple third party sources. Further it is in line with the write-ups of all other honor societies including Golden_Key_International_Honour_Society and Mortar_Board. If HonorSociety.org is to be deleted, serious consideration needs to be given to deleting these other pages as well. I believe a notice for more reference needed should be attached to the article, and it should be left for peer improvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.18.77 (talk) 19:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let us look at those third-party sources. I can find zero mentions of honorsociety.org at the Bruin Dance Party site. I find one sentence about honorsociety.org at the CollegeBudget page, and it's part of CollegeBudget promoing a mutual effort ("We've teamed with HonorSociety.org to create a platform to help students initiate causes, rally support and raise funds collectively.") The MBAcrunch review is self-published by a blog author whose only posts during 2012 were hyping honorsociety.org... on a blog that seems to simply be an automatic reblog of academix press releases, to support a page that is trying to sell ads and failing, on a website that, judging by its Alexa ranking, has hardly been detected. As for those other pages, if you believe that they should be deleted, I encourage you to use the various Wikipedia deletion processes to address them. --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree with Nat Gertler and HMSSolent. The organization appears to be non-notable, due to lack of results on Google News, and trivial results on Google search. There are a lot of results on YouTube, but those are mostly self-published videos. Edge3 (talk) 03:43, 22 April 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.