Talk:Student Sport Ireland
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | The contents of the Student Sport Ireland page were merged into Sport in Ireland#Student sport on 26 June 2025. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Notability
[edit]The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived: outcome was: merged/redirected
Resolved Not having heard any other thoughts, I've gone ahead with the merge and redirect. Guliolopez (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
If independent notability of this org cannot be established (by references and examples of in-depth coverage in multiple/reliable sources which are independent of the subject - as expected by WP:SIGCOV and WP:ORGCRIT), then I wonder if the title should be redirected to Sport_in_Ireland#Student_sport. And the topic covered there.
As it stands, this 4-person(?) org doesn't appear to be covered in any material depth in national or regional news sources. For example:
- RTE.ie has just a few passing mentions (one of which can be used to support article text but doesn't support a claim to notability - as its a passing mention)
- Irish Times also has false positives and a few scant passing mentions (one of which, again, can be used to partially address the over-reliance on the org's own website - but again doesn't deal with the subject org in any material depth)
- Irish Independent stable of national/regional papers returns 15 results - none of which seem to deal with the org in any depth. (One of which I've added to support some basic text - but I don't see how it supports NORG - as it's scarcely a passing mention).
- Irish Examiner also only has a few passing mentions (none of which especially useful in supporting text - and not contributing to notability)
- Belfast Telegraph has ONE result (a passing mention).
- A search on TheJournal.ie returns only a SINGLE passing mention (again, where the org is simply listed alongside dozens of other funding recipients).
What am I missing? Is there any independent coverage which deals with the subject as a primary topic? Guliolopez (talk) 19:43, 10 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think that is probably the right answer, not least because the content may get more views on that page. Whizz40 (talk) 10:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
- It seems odd to me, but I also checked this organisation out last week, and coverage is remarkably poor, for something connected to so many institutions, and theoretically cross-working with many sport governing bodies. So perhaps for now, a merge-in and redirect-with-potential are the best course. SeoR (talk) 11:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
- OK. Thanks @SeoR and @Whizz40. As it's been ~2 weeks since the merge was proposed (twice as long as that suggested in WP:MERGECLOSE), and unless there are other thoughts, I'm going to go ahead as proposed in the coming days.... Guliolopez (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- It seems odd to me, but I also checked this organisation out last week, and coverage is remarkably poor, for something connected to so many institutions, and theoretically cross-working with many sport governing bodies. So perhaps for now, a merge-in and redirect-with-potential are the best course. SeoR (talk) 11:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
Resolved Not having heard any other thoughts, I've gone ahead with the merge and redirect. Guliolopez (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2025 (UTC)