Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forth and Clyde Canal Society

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 merge to Forth and Clyde Canal. (non-admin closure) Laurdecl ^talk 09:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Forth and Clyde Canal Society

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

Doesn't meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Prisencolin removed notability and refimprove tags with no edit summary and has not responded to my request to start a conversation about it on article's talk page. Boleyn (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Articles on enthusiast-based organisations can be problematic: a passion and dedication for the few but lacking notice by the wider community. In this case, however, I think there is enough in terms of coverage of ongoing visitor operations on the canal (as can be seen in various pieces of coverage, albeit local, under a Highbeam search), but more in terms of the earlier campaigning for reopening (which also led to creation of one of Scotland's leading tourist attractions: the Falkirk Wheel) to demonstrate a lasting impact which makes this reasonable for an encyclopaedia entry. (An alternative might be a merger of the article content into Forth_and_Clyde_Canal#Run_down_and_revival, which should at minimum be extended to mention the Society anyway.) AllyD (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Merge to Forth and Clyde Canal. Mais oui! (talk) 06:57, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Merge to Forth and Clyde Canal. Tourists should be able to see this information.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 18:20, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Forth and Clyde Canal for now, but no prejudice against a full article, if someone wants to write it. Sourcing should be possible, see below list. Why is this taken to AFD? WP:ATD-M is policy, and Forth and Clyde Canal Society is a perfectly normal categorized {{R to related topic}}. — Sam Sailor 02:55, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

Thomas J. Dowds (1 January 2003). The Forth and Clyde Canal: A History. Dundurn. pp. 84–. ISBN 978-1-86232-232-5. The formation of the Forth and Clyde Canal Society in 1980 marked a turning point. Now there was a group of enthusiasts prepared to devote time to advancing the cause of restoration. It worked alongside the British Waterways Board and ...
C. Philip Wheater (31 January 2002). Urban Habitats. Routledge. pp. 167–. ISBN 978-1-134-71572-5.
Len Paterson (14 November 2012). From Sea to Sea: A History of the Scottish Lowland and Highland Canals. Neil Wilson Publishing. pp. 178–. ISBN 978-1-906000-34-9. The Forth and Clyde Canal Society put an excursion vessel, the Ferry Queen, into operation in 1982. (The name was the combination of adeference to the turnofthe century excursionfleet and to thefactthat the craft was a converted river Clyde ...
A. Ian Bowman (1984). Swifts & Queens: Passenger Transport on the Forth & Clyde Canal. Strathkelvin District Libraries & Museums. pp. 73–. ISBN 978-0-904966-11-4. In the 1970s the Scottish Inland Waterways Association, and in 1980 the Forth and Clyde Canal Society were formed by canal lovers. Supported by British Waterways Board, Strathclyde Regional Council and Caledonian Estates they set to ...
Miriam R. McDonald (1996). A guide to Scottish industrial heritage. Scottish Industrial Heritage Society. pp. 13–. ISBN 978-0-9528555-0-7.
ROSC. John Donald Publishers, and National Museum of Antiquities of Scotland. 2005. pp. 131–. A Forth and Clyde Canal Society was founded in 1980, enthusiasts helped to clean it up in sections, and the selection of Glasgow as the European City of Culture in the same year as the 200th anniversary of the opening of the canal helped to ...

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.