Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Division of Clinical Neuropsychology

Division of Clinical Neuropsychology

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

DePRODed without addressing the notability issues (unreferenced, no reliable sources). As a small division (only 4,000 members) of a larger organisation , it does not credibly assert notability for a stand-alone article. May be possible to merge it to the parent article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is merely one division (out of 40 56 according to this) of the American Psychological Association, and there is nothing to suggest it is particularly notable. I would oppose a merge because none of the other divisions have coverage or even a mention at the parent article; no reason why this should be the only one. Anyhow, there is no verified information to merge, since the article contains no sources. I would oppose a redirect because the name is so generic. --MelanieN (talk) 15:07, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. When the WP:SPA creator removed the PROD, they claimed that three other divisions of the APA have Wikipedia articles. We might want to locate those articles (I was unable to in a brief search) and consider their notability as well. --MelanieN (talk) 15:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete Information has been added to the article with reliable references from sources not affiliated with APA or the Division of Clinical Neuropsychology, to address one of the comments made by Kudpung, above. 152.131.10.133 (talk) 19:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)Uspring76[reply]

The references do not appear to address notability issues. Are they strictly about, and dedicated to the history, work, andimportance of this small academic division, and are they the required kind of WP:RS? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete Clinical Neuropsychology is a major specialty within the field of psychology (in clinical, research and training contexts), and this organization is central in establishing standards and policies for this specialty. Although the importance was not necessarily highlighted in the previous version, I believe the new additions to the wiki reflect this now.152.131.10.133 (talk) 21:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)Pacific03062006[reply]

Keep Ordinary article that meets out WP:N/WP:GNG guideline, a verifiable topic that we want to cover. Given our WP:ATD alternatives for deletion policy, we would delete neither the edit history nor the redirect. If someone wants to merge the four division articles, they should do so, I think they'll find that the encyclopedia is better factored as four articles, but these topics might fit together reasonably. Unscintillating (talk) 04:27, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]