Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ohio Northern Region BBYO

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio Northern Region BBYO

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

WP:BRANCH -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 00:57, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete- per Branch, and clear COI for creator. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 01:52, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk • mail) 02:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete - we don't include local and regional groupings of national or international groups open to general membership per
WP:BRANCH, why would we have an article on a regional groupings of an organization whose membership is limited to the followers of a certain religion? After having more than one article taken to deletion on this general subject, it's getting difficult to AGF of the creator of this advitorial. John from Idegon (talk) 11:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete - BBYO has an article. Adding articles for regional branches is akin to making separate articles for Boy Scout Troops.Ryecatcher773 (talk) 05:42, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per
WP:BRANCH. The religious character of the organization is irrelevant. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:04, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. No proof of notability--that this was a promotional piece is quite clear. Drmies (talk) 23:39, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Do not delete. Multiple sources have been added that prove notability. This truly is a legitimate organization with both local and international recognition. Mark612 (talk) 22:32, 7 November 2017

most of those "sources" are small, local. not the kind of sources that would satisfy
WP:BRANCH. branches of notable organizations are not automatically notable, rather, must be notable in their own right. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 03:46, 8 November 2017 (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.