Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Board of Agrément

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 - the consensus is that as a national standards body, for which reliable sources are available, it is notable. The article requires work, in particular the addition of sources, but these issues can be dealt with by editing. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 23:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

British Board of Agrément

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

No third-party references at all and does not seem (to me) to pass WP:ORG for notability. Primary article contributors are single-purpose accounts that have only edited this article. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle) 17:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Plenty of third party refs can be found; this search, in particular, shows many instances of government departments (local and national) referring to the organisation on a par with BSI Group. I believe these demonstrate ample notability. RichardOSmith (talk) 21:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The article passes WP:ORG for notability, of being an official UK body that has significant or demonstrable effects on society by providing certification of safety for construction products and systems and providing inspection services in support of their installers. Northamerica1000 (talk) 21:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable and encyclopedic. As pointed out above, it is a national standards body exercising a quasi-public function. There is plenty of evidence in a Google search to demonstrate the nature of its work and its significance. Or see this book for an example of its publications. There is coverage here in a independent publication, but GNG isn't really relevant to national regulatory and standards bodies if they are officially sanctioned. --AJHingston (talk) 21:55, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 7 September 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.