Deletion of Ukrainian Artists Society of Australia

Comment: I think that the post at 06:09 1 February 2011 (UTC) by the nominator should be considered as withdrawing the nomination in lieu of WP:PROVEIT.&nbsp; Also, I suggest that the nominator review Wikipedia:Guide to deletion.  "...invite discussion on the talk page by using the {{tl|notability}} template, if you are disputing the notability of an article's subject. The fact that you haven't heard of something, or don't personally consider it worthy, are not criteria for deletion."&nbsp; To editors that want to keep this article, I'm also noting  by which I'd suggest that they add some translations into English of citations
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:NONENG)

Comment: as a non commercial organisation I don't see this meeting the criteria of  there is no widespread attention or influence of this organisation. It has held numerous exhibitions in its 43 year history but can't even get a mention in the Australian press. none whatsoever
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CLUB)

Comment: can the 2 keep voters please indicate how the sources refer to the article text to establish notability. neither has attempted to find other sources to establish notability. This nomination does not qualify for |speedy keep in the absence of a lack of verification of inline text or other sources to establish notability
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Speedy keep (WP:SK)

Comment: The nominator has failed to demonstrate (or even indicate) why the cited sources are insufficient to satisfy establish notability, and in lieu of any such demonstration, this obviously satisfies the |general notability guideline (and  for good measure).  There's nothing wrong with using |offline sources, and while inline citations are desirable, a lack thereof is |not even close to being grounds for deletion.&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ORG||WP:OFFLINE||WP:ATD)