Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Master Photographers Association

: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. — Cirt (talk) 18:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

=[[Master Photographers Association]]=

:{{la|Master Photographers Association}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Master Photographers Association}})

My searches have not found any direct, detailed, significant coverage of this organisation. ╟─Treasury Tag►hemicycle─╢ 16:56, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Weak keep -- while like TT, I couldn't find any in-depth coverage, I found a lot of references to the awards they give. If their awards are notable, it would seem to follow that they are notable as well. (Yes, I know, WP:NOTINHERITED, but...) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
:Could you cite some of this coverage of their awards of which you speak? ╟─Treasury Tag►tortfeasor─╢ 17:51, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
::"[http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/local/photographers_snap_up_awards_1_1065839 prestigious MPA awards]", "[http://www.waterford-news.ie/news/kfcweykfkf/ beat off competition from 1600 other Master photographers]", "[http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20040201/local/photographer-wins-international-award-in-uk.131006 top international prize]", "[http://www.viewfrompublishing.co.uk/news_view/6363/15/1/dorchester-dorchester-photographer-is-short most prestigious awards for photographers in the UK]" -- and that's just in the first two pages of GNews hits. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:11, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
:::Use of the word 'prestigious' doesn't automatically make that "direct, detailed coverage" however. Plus, as you say, notability is not inherited. ╟─Treasury Tag►voice vote─╢ 18:13, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
::::Nope. But it does indicate to me that there very likely is coverage out there somewhere that I'm not seeing at the top of the Google hits. Hopefully, someone on that side of the pond will know which sources to check out to fill in the blanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:20, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
:::::So until that happens, you're basically saying WP:MUSTBESOURCES? ╟─Treasury Tag►Captain-Regent─╢ 18:21, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
::::::More like WP:GIVENTHESOURCESWEDOHAVEWEKNOWTHEREMUSTBEBETTERONESOUTTHEREMAYBEOFFLINE.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
:::::::I haven't found any in-depth coverage yet. To help weed out "is registered as Master Photographer by..." type results I searched for "Master Photographers Association" 1952 in Google books, which yielded only a handful of results, none of them significant.--Pontificalibus (talk) 20:48, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 19:00, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Delete - No coverage in reliable sources, and the sourcing for the awards which might be sort of an indirect way to establish notability are thin at best. -- Whpq (talk) 14:46, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

: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.