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. NYT source not reliable. SI source is passing reference. Let me know if you want the text to merge portions into University of Connecticut. Dcoetzee 07:07, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UConn Alumni Association[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. All but two of the sources cited are published either by or for the university. The one of the other two sources, by Sports Illustrated, does not even mention the alumni association by name. The other from the New York Times, is in reference to an obituary that mentions the association in passing. TM 12:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As stated in the lede, the AA is a branch of University governance, it is a noteworthy part of the University. Further, the article is more than adequately sourced. The NY Times source points out the (minor) notability of a service award that's been given for over 20 years, as the Sports Illustrated article is for the sport of Oozeball, which originated at UConn and would probably not exist without the organization of the AA. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 15:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Every university has some sort of an alumni association that is part of university governance. Perhaps you could merge some of the more notable aspects into a section at University of Connecticut. As far as a standalone article, this fails WP:GNG without multiple, independent, reliable sources covering the subject in detail. If you can find such sources, by all means, add and improve the article. As it stands now, it is a run of the mill alumni association.--TM 17:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Er, no. I can rattle off half a dozen AAs off the top of my head that serve no part in their University governance, it is (as far as I know) a fairly unusual state of affairs. As for GNG, the minimum required is two sources and it has that. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 18:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:GNG with multiple reliable sources indicating notability. Delete - per belowFalcon8765 ^(TALK) 21:40, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which sources are substantive and independent?--TM 21:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Case in point: The New York Times article which might in fact have helped this article passes GNG is a paid obituary and says simply that RICH, FRANK D., JR. receuved "the University Service Award from the UConn Alumni Association in 1986", so that obviously provides no in-depth coverage. I have removed the NBC Connecticut link which was previously on the page because it made no mention whatsoever of the alumni association. The sports illustrated article also makes no mention whatsoever of the alumni association. If we ignore these spurious links, we are left with exactly 0 articles which cover the association with any depth and are intellectually independent of the university or alumni association.--TM 15:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete First, there is no evidence in the article that it has any connection with the university government--very few do. And very few are notable , The GNG is not met-- the sources are either totally trivial mentions, or not 3rd party. DGG ( talk ) 19:24, 5 December 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.