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. (non-admin closure) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:07, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

American Nitrox Divers International[edit]

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

Queried prod delete: User request in my talk page: "Hi Anthony, American Nitrox Divers International was deleted without adequate discussion as not notable by User:Rjd0060 who has not edited since April and has not responded to a routine request to undelete. Could you take a look? Cheers • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 16:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)". Web search for "ANDI" is swamped by other meanings of the acronym/word/name. This article has stood since 21:45, 16 November 2007‎ (UTC). (Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC))[reply]
Weak keep: Thanks to Cowdy001, there are now several more citations. The recognition section now contains independent sources that recognise ANDI as a training agency (EUF Certification and UK Health & Safety Executive). I'd like to see one or two more independent sources that gave more extensive coverage to ANDI and a section on its history. In the early 1990s it was one of the two main agencies (along with IANTD) certifying divers to use nitrox, and that was to some extent controversial, so I expect there must be magazines from that era carrying stories. I'll see if I can find some. --RexxS (talk) 06:18, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Well known certification organisation in recreational and technical diving circles. Internationally recognised, and has been around longer than most. EUF certification is fair evidence of notability in this field. • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 07:58, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: organisation which has been a key player in the introduction of nitrox to recreational diving and in the development of technical diving including the use of rebreathers. Cowdy001 (talk) 10:45, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:19, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:19, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:19, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Note that being "well known" or "a key player" isn't a good reason to keep an article. However, a quick google search suggests that there are sufficient independent reliable sources available on ANDI and SafeAir to pass WP:GNG. e.g. [1], [2], [3]. Pburka (talk) 16:00, 31 July 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.