Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leamington chess club

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 no consensus. Sandstein 17:52, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Leamington chess club

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

Chess club with no significant coverage of the club itself. There is some coverage of some of the members, but not of the club. David Hodgkins appears to deserve his own article, but the club doesn't become notable because it has a notable member.Jakejr (talk) 06:44, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, seems to be some coverage in books, going back as much as 200 years ago.--Prisencolin (talk) 22:48, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG. The proposed sources only mention the club in passing, with the focus being on individual members who happen to be part of the club. Astudent0 (talk) 15:01, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. [1] is a brief mention but from 1908 when coverage was much more limited (paper cost money). There is evidence that there was more coverage back in the day, but it's not searchable online ([2] for example). [3] is a pretty brief mention in the more modern day. Hobit (talk) 17:32, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:36, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:34, 9 September 2016 (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.