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. postdlf (talk) 13:03, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD, Article is WP:Wikipuffery and information listed is completely primary. Phearson (talk) 21:45, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - notability not established via independent, third party sources. News search only generates a handful of hits, mostly local papers mentioning a student who has been "selected" for this pay society. SeaphotoTalk 23:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It has been referenced in national/international news outlets including the BBC, and in several online sources, and more substantially,I think it's notability is bolstered by the many thousands of members it has, a criterion provided for by WP:NGO (the size of it's membership is a factor that has attracted widespread attention.) Lord Arador (talk) 06:17, 28 March 2011 (UTC) — Lord Arador (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Comment - That link is to the Better Business Bureau, and not to the BBC. Did you make a mistake in copy-pasting a link as I can find no BBC coverage. -- Whpq (talk) 16:56, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I apologize, that link was in err. I mistook it for a BBC article. Lord Arador (talk) 18:03, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - So you still advocate keep when there is not a single reliable source covering it? The size of its membership has attracted no attention as far as anyone (you included) can determine. -- Whpq (talk) 18:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - After further review of WP:IS, I no longer support keeping this article. Lord Arador (talk) 19:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Lots of mentions of such and such a student being selected or honoured but absolutely no coverage of any significance about the organisation. -- Whpq (talk) 16:56, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's important to keep this article, but emphasize that this is not the National Honor Society. My daughter is a high school student and is getting deluged with solicitations to join various organizations or embark on various "prestigious" gatherings. It's clear 99% of them are just money making schemes, and it's important to have a resource to discern the wheat from the chaff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott see (talk • contribs) 17:32, 30 March 2011 (UTC) — Scott see (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete based on the lack of reliable secondary sourcing nowhere to be found. And now that I'm looking around, it's a scam? Oh boy. Fell for it if so. If not, wooh, all those people thinking it's a scam. :/ --Izno (talk) 22:31, 30 March 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.