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.
Non-notable group, still trying to figure out why CSD was denied for this. Ridernyc (talk) 18:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's not one of the world's largest or best-known scientific organizations, but it seems to be a legitimate scientific society. I added some sourced content to the article. The society has been the subject of third-party coverage, confirming notability, although it's hard to find the coverage and evaluate it, since most of the available sources seem to be in the Estonian language. --Orlady (talk) 02:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per User:Orlady's sourcing. I'm sure that further sources exist in the Estonian language. Lankiveil(speak to me) 11:01, 16 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Keep - If properly sourced, there is no reason that even a small scientific group could be notable and have its own article. Bearian (talk) 19:01, 16 June 2011 (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.