Deletion of Peucinian Society (2nd nomination)

Comment: due to failure to meet . I also consider any article to be suspicious if a sock/meatpuppet flood derails its AFD
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: As others have said: seems to fail  - and even if it were verifiable, unnotable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: Keep''' Let's check the sources for this, shall we? First hit on google: http://library.bowdoin.edu/arch/archives/psg.shtml An archive, by the college of the minutes and info of the society. The National Library of Australia cites this http://nladom-test.nla.gov.au/anbd.bib-an8307499, looks self published though. And more important, the book that is the main source for Literary Societies refers to this society. Making it notable by , covered in a reliable secondary source. And I didn't even check Google Scholar. But the article needs serious improvement. On a side note, why the revert war to put it back to stub or the other version
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Seems notable?"  Errr ... is there any reason to think that it '''is''' notable, or that there are any |reliable sources about this obscure society other than an archival note on the Bowdoin library website stating that it existed?  Did this group have any influence other than that it purportedly had members who became famous later in life?  (Emphasis on "purportedly;" there is no evidence on offer that any of those blue-links were actual members.)  Almost all the work on this article comes from two SPAs who've slipped Peucinian references in to other articles
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)