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. Stifle (talk) 19:37, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Kairos society (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Delete fails WP:ORG, no significant coverage in reliable sources; sourced to its website and youtube. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I have read a lot about this non-profit organization in the news and have heard a lot about it on campus. I did some research and filled the article with the appropriate references to credible sources. Please see updated page. Hope this helps!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.231.16.57 (talk • contribs)

• Comment - Deletion? Are you kidding me? Kairos Society is a premier student entrepreneurship organization, they definitely deserve to have an article on wikipedia!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.48.248.18 (talk • contribs)

• Comment - There are several credible sources which reference this article - including CNN. If the content is notable enough for CNN, it merits a wikiedia entry.
• Delete - This article has an impressive number of unreliable sources in it. Among the few reliable ones (including CNN) coverage was insignificant. A great effort to show notability that has failed. Keep in mind this is a discussion, not a vote, and you have to come up with an explanation as to why it meets WP:N or WP:ORG. Having a representative from the society briefly interviewed on CNN doesn't suffice. -- Atama^chat 18:51, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Keep - I don't really understand what the concern is here. The Kairos Society is well known and well respected amongst the business circles as the leading international network of collegiate entrepreneurs. The rules of Wikipedia under Notability for organizations says that the following types of groups can be included:
  
  an organization is a group of more than one person formed together for a purpose. This includes commercial and non-commercial activities, such as charitable organizations, educational institutions, hospitals, institutions, interest groups, organizations, social clubs, companies, partnerships, proprietorships, religious denominations, sects, etc.
  
  The Kairos Society is a non-profit educational organization and therefore fits that criteria.
  
  The rules for notability state that: Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice." It is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance." Please consider notable and demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education.
  
  As referenced in the article and on their website (www.kairossociety.com -- go to videos) there are VIDEOS of highly credible leaders such as President Clinton and Bill Gates Sr (co-chair of the Gates Foundation) talking about the importance of the Kairos Society in the field of global entrepreneurship. Then in the later reference, their are videos and quotes from other highly credible leaders including Ellen Kullman (CEO DuPont) and Admiral William Owens (Former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) also noting the importance of the Kairos Society. It would seem to me that credible sources like these discussing the importance of this organization establish notability.
  
  Finally, the rules say for non-commercial orgs are:
  1. The scope of their activities is national or international in scale.
  2. Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by third-party, independent, reliable sources.
  
  In this case the Kairos Society is a parent group with chapters in the United States and China as referenced in multiple articles and the videos. The information is verified in news media ranging from Silicon India to CNN to ABC's show "The Rise to the Top" to Nationally Distributed University Newspapers.
  Based on all this it seems clear to me that the Kairos Society meets Wiki's criteria and should be kept.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.92.185.41 (talk • contribs)
  • Reply - It is obvious that there is a campaign going on, possibly from Kairos itself but possibly not, to have defenders come to Wikipedia to argue for this article to be kept. Please remember that Wikipedia is an encylopedia to share important knowledge, not a place to get the word out about a group. We have policies in place governing article inclusion, which state that an article must be shown to be notable with significant coverage from independent reliable sources. Surely if what you claim is true someone can do that. You cannot argue that Kairos is notable because its web site says so, and bringing in a bunch of people saying "please keep this article" isn't going to be effective, this is not a vote. Other established editors may disagree with me, and that is all well and good, hopefully there will be more who can contribute to the discussion. -- Atama^chat 17:22, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Hi Atama, thanks for taking the time to make sure Wikipedia stays true to its principles. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and when I came accross the Kairos Society article being considered for deletion felt it important to add my support, leading to my posting the first comment and adding some sources to the article (Please note that I have no affiliation with this group). I have become familiar with the Kairos Society recently through a series of videos sent to me of CEOs that have talked about Kairos and also through endorsement emails from my university of this international NGO. I've seen quite a few impressive videos where 3rd party, independent leaders are talking about the importance of Kairos, but am unsure how you would recommmend referencing these sources since many of the videos are hosted directly on the Kairos Website. I have posted a few sources below of the videos and various news sources that I have found which I believe shows the notability of this organization. I truly believe that the work this non-profit is doing is important to our world economy and certainly meets Wikipedia's standards. I look forward to your thoughts!
  *Article in this month's Silicon India (a highly circulated publication in India and the US): http://www.siliconindia.com/magazine/articledesc.php?articleid=POBF432214427
  *CNN Interview with Founder: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ5C1ttVZTA
  *Feature on ABC's Show "The Rise to the Top": http://www.therisetothetop.com/hot-companies.php?episode_ID=11
  *Barron's Magazine (Financial Magazine of the Wall Street Journal): http://online.barrons.com/article/SB123940720563610017.html
  *President Clinton Talk about the Kairos Society: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1RLbFaCrrk
  *Washington Square News: http://www.nyunews.com/news/university/biz-kids-network-with-pros-at-kairos-1.1643580
  *The Daily Trojan: http://media.www.dailytrojan.com/news/kairos-summit-showcased-top-100-student-businesses-1.1646423
  *Bill Gates Sr talks about Kairos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xRvXeJo5C4
  *Central New York News/The Post Standard: http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/su_students_win_top_business_a.html
  *Council on Competitiveness Announcement: http://www.compete.org/news/entry/661/council-president-joins-kairos-summit-speakers-to-encourage-collegiate-entrepreneurs/
  
  Thanks again Atama!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.231.16.57 (talk • contribs)

• Reply - I've already addressed most of these before, let me go through them one at a time.

Silicon India - This is a social networking site, that hosts blogs. Not a news organization.

CNN Interview - This is actually not a bad reference. Wikipedia frowns on Youtube links but it is CNN.

The Rise to the Top - Not a show from the ABC network, a show from a local ABC affiliate.

Barron's Magazine - I already covered this, this isn't significant coverage, very brief blurb.

Washington Square News - An NYU student article, not even close to WP:RS.

The Daily Trojan - Yet another student article, this one from the USC.

The Post Standard - A brief blurb, less than the Barron's Magazine blurb.

Council on Competitiveness - Not even a news site, not sure what this is supposed to be.

Bill Gates and Bill Clinton - Not impressed. There was a summit where they spoke to 100 students, a few were from Kairos.

Again, the volume of references doesn't matter. The reliability of the sources and the depth of coverage is what matters. The closest thing that you have that meets that is the CNN interview, and that is arguable, but either way that alone isn't enough. -- Atama^chat 07:08, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply -Atama, this is Ankur Jain the founder of the Kairos Society. I was quite surprised and dissapointed when my team directed me to this page to find this back and forth argument debating the validity and importance of our organization. While relatively small in size, our organization has attracted the support of many top universities, students, and CEOs. The guidelines in WP:ORG you referenced above state that "smaller organizations can be notable, just as individuals can be notable, and arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations." Like many smaller, but impactful organizations, we have been fortunate to recieve some national press such as our CNN feature and Silicon India (which by the way is in fact an independently written and distributed magazine. I would be happy to send you a copy if you would like). I think it is creating an unfair bias to dismiss independent sources such as university newspapers, our article in Silicon India, the coverage in the ABC affiliate show (which is broadcast to over half a million viewers!), or endorsements from CEOs around the country as unreliable. While certainly smaller in circulation than CNN, each of these are independently verified, third party news organizations and shows that have covered us. If for nothing else, our organization has become highly notable for the annual summit we host which brings together the Kairos students from around the world and many succesful leaders. According to WP:RS, sources must be third party and published. Each of the references mentioned by the person above have followed that criteria. Like many other non-profit organizations listed in Wikipedia, it only seems appropriate to include the Kairos Society as a parent organization. If there were seperate entries for each chapter, I would agree that there is not sufficient notability, but for the parent organization as whole the collection of articles from various locales around the country should warrant significant reliability. In fact, this was also mentioned in WP:ORG under the non-commercial section.

If you have specific recommendations for how to improve the article, we would be honored to have you incorporate them into the page. However, if for some reason you still do not believe in the importance of this organization, I kindly ask that you defer to another moderator for a second opinion. And if you would like references from the CEOs who have supported our mission, I would be more than happy to provide them for you. Thanks! Starnium (talk)— Starnium (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Reply - I am sorry if my support for the deletion of the article for your company has offended you, but I do so under the guidelines and policies of Wikipedia. I have nothing against your organization personally, I simply don't feel it meets our notability requirements, and there is no "improvement" of the article that you can do to prove otherwise except to find, as I had stated, significant coverage in reliable sources. These are not my requirements, these are the guidelines of WP:N. Let me tell you that this campaign of having numerous people from your organization flooding this discussion is counter-productive, Wikipedia generally discourages such actions. There is no need for me to "defer" to another "moderator", I am just a regular editor offering my opinion and any other editor is welcome to do the same. I'm eager to see what another regular editor of Wikipedia would say to this discussion, so far I see the original nominator of the deletion discussion and myself asking for deletion against a number of members of the Kairos organization wishing to ensure that their article stays on Wikipedia out of a wish to promote the organization, or a sense of personal pride perhaps. I don't fault you for doing so, it speaks well of you that you have such loyalty to your organization, but at the same time that is not what this discussion is about. I do await more opinion from another uninvolved editor. Thank you. -- Atama^chat 23:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I have followed the discussion and believe both parties are committed to doing the right thing; however, as Atama stated (very eloquently I might add) the guidelines do not belong to any one editor, but rather have been developed as a consensus of opinions and are in place to to help insure the quality of Wikipedia articles. I suggest you read the policies in notability. I do not see any bias either against your organization or smaller organizations, nor would I characterize the guidelines as arbitrary. The bottom line is the references just do not seem to provide the support needed. My best to everyone involved in this. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Quoting WP:RS, Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. I consider student newspapers to be reliable in relation to the subject of a not-for-profit, college-age entrepreneurs. However, the coverage they provide about the subject is trivial, focussing only on an individual event (the summit). No reliable source provides significant coverage of the subject at hand. Perhaps in the future, there will be more significant coverage of this society, but there doesn't seem to be any right now. Sancho 06:22, 2 July 2009 (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.