Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/West London Penguin Swimming and Water Polo 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 keep. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 21:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
West London Penguin Swimming and Water Polo Club
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- West London Penguin Swimming and Water Polo Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not finding significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. Fails
WP:ORGCRIT. AusLondonder (talk) 03:15, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Sports, and England. AusLondonder (talk) 03:17, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Founded in 1916 and 1921 for the two genders, with substantial history. --Doncram (talk) 23:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete no evidence of significant coverage to pass WP:GNG- being old doesn't make it automatically notable. [1] is just a short paragraph mentioning the club, and [2] just mentions a couple of events held there- neither are significant coverage. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:58, 16 May 2022 (UTC)]
- Still adding sources including feature articles. It will take some time. Cielquiparle (talk) 08:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Seven-time National Water Polo Championship title holders (well, which I've found so far), with at least three feature articles – [3] and [4] (both posted after Joseph2302's comment), plus the June 1952 cover story in The Swimming Times which unfortunately is not available online. Quite possible that there are other feature articles, but given all the additional media coverage historically for the 2–3 different incarnations of the club over more than a century (not to mention at least 23 GB Olympians affiliated with the club plus other internationals), it will take more time to go through it all. (The complicated current club name does not help.) But given what I've found to date, I am satisfied of the subject's notability, and also tried to add some inline citations, woefully lacking previously. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that from 16 May 2022 (UTC) to 18 May 2022 (UTC), the article was significantly expanded, and many new sources were added.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:16, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. @AusLondonder: and @Joseph2302:, could you please take another look at the article? I have expanded it substantially, also with more substantial sources, and tried to demonstrate notability. There are still several additional articles I am chasing down from Swimming Times magazine which will require multiple trips to the library, but I think this is in much better shape now. Also happy to hear any feedback, suggestions, or questions on the Article Talk page. Cielquiparle (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It has significant coverage on particular sources and passes the ]
- Keep significant coverage per Cielquiparle. Going from 1 reference to 84 is really impressive, nice expansion work! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I think the expansion justifies inclusion. All those Olympians! Lajmmoore (talk) 19:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Massively expanded since the nomination. [5], [6], [7] and [8] more than meet the standard of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject required by ]
- 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.