Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instituto Nacional Meteorologia y Hidrologia

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. Tone 19:45, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Instituto Nacional Meteorologia y Hidrologia

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

Horridly unintelligible crap about a seemingly minor agency, the notability of which is not established through multiple, independent sources. Biruitorul ^Talk 04:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Every country's weather service is notable. This one is from Ecuador. For the previous group AfD for this article, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secreteria Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia – Eastmain (talk) 06:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Eastmain. It could definitely be improved, but meets notability almost inherently. LotLE×talk 09:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This AfD is one of a batch nominated at the same time by the same nominator (and created, I believe, by the same editor). All of them concern Ecuadoran government agencies, and all are admittedly written in rather rough English. Commentators on this AfD might be interested in looking up those others. LotLE×talk 20:57, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 06:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Contrary to the hostile nomination statement, it appears to be a notable scientific institution for the nation that it serves. Warrah (talk) 14:18, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: article has been moved to its proper title.Synchronism (talk) 07:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: relisted to allow for consideration together with sever other related AfDs, also relisted due to insufficient participation. Tim Song (talk) 01:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep; rewritten so the poor English offends the nominator less. Notable scientific agency (national weather agencies are notable; we list down to the state level for the U.S.) -- phoebe / (talk to me) 01:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
note moved to Instituto Nacional Meteorologia e Hidrologia (Equador) as it seems that Venezuela's and possibly other countries weather services are called the same thing. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 02:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the one in the heading, renominate for the others -- there is no reason to think the notability will be similar -- they are every one of them a different organization and must be judged individually, ` DGG ( talk ) 03:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I removed the list of other articles - this is actually not a group nomination. The listed articles were nominated separately; each of the nominations has been relisted due to insufficient participation and are currently listed in Nov 28's log. Tim Song (talk) 04:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per phoebe's work, and the somewhat inherent notability of the subject, especially given that this is a maritime country's meteorological service.Synchronism (talk) 13:32, 28 November 2009 (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.