Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organizations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Organizations and social programs. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Organizations|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Organizations and social programs. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Suggested inclusion guidelines for this topic area can be found at WP:ORG.

Purge page cache watch

Organizations deletion

[edit]
Tangatawhenua.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. All references that mention it are quite trivial are in reference to other things. The best reference I could find [1] was only a trivial mention of the site. The site's founder could be notable but he doesn't have an article. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brysam Global Partners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Imcdc Contact 06:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RLH Equity Partners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Imcdc Contact 02:12, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Permanent Revolution (group) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Defunct minor Trotskyist group. No demonstration of meeting GNG within the article, with sourcing being from self-published sources (mostly their own) so violates WP:ABOUTSELF. Checks on scholar show no notable academic discussion of the group. No likelihood of improvement and no obvious redirect targets.

Delete. Rambling Rambler (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The North American Discworld Convention (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BEFORE only showed unreliable sources such as blogs and fan sites, or other passing mentions. This does not have reliable secondary sources to achieve WP:SIGCOV. Jontesta (talk) 00:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Maldivian Engineers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No notability of this association and no public information about it. Closest thing available was the "Association of Civil Engineers Maldives" Unilandofma(Talk to me!) 11:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I.I.M.U.N. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The Wikipedia page for IIMUN (India's International Movement to Unite Nations) does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria as outlined in the General Notability Guidelines (GNG). While the organization claims widespread activity and recognition, the sources cited are primarily self-published or lack significant, reliable secondary coverage in independent publications. The majority of the references either originate from IIMUN itself, social media posts, or promotional material, which are insufficient to establish notability. Furthermore, the achievements mentioned, such as organizing large-scale conferences and initiatives like "Find a Bed," fail to receive substantial and consistent coverage from reputable third-party sources over a significant period. Without verifiable, independent, and non-trivial coverage, the subject cannot be deemed notable under Wikipedia's policies. Therefore, the article does not merit inclusion and should be considered for deletion. Likehumansdo (talk) 09:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noventi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. The notability requirements for companies is much higher now. Article seems to be created by COI user. Imcdc Contact 09:10, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not sure why this minor group of nuns has it's own article but I cannot find secondary sources covering them. My searches turn up more information on a Ugandan group with the same name. Traumnovelle (talk) 23:30, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maoist Communist Party (France) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. Every source given is from the organisation itself or a Maoist blog site, except one by the conservative tabloid Diario Correo, which mentions the French organisation in passing. Online searches in English, French, and Spanish return zero reliable sources, and I doubt such sources will be found in print offline. Yue🌙 06:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MCI Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. Previously PROD. Imcdc Contact 04:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Library of Cameroon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no "National Library of Cameroon". The current coordinates given are to the national museum. The national archives, which are the largest museum in the country, have their own seperate entry.-- NotCharizard 🗨 15:11, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What do you make of the first reference? The deletion discussion says there is no "National Library of Cameroon" but the source suggests there is.
On another note, the coordinates given (3.8611940644516403°N 11.516500695387736°E) are highly suspect. I'm not sure where those came from, but they have an astonishing 16 decimal digits of precision, which is sub-nanometer precision and nonsensical for a building. Crystalholm (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vintage Real Estate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Previously speedy deleted. Recreated by WP:SPA. Imcdc Contact 02:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the edit history, I would say the opposite, but hope I'm proven wrong. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:10, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Young Liberals (UK) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only one source is independent and third party (Guardian) but does not mention article subject at all. Lists of members names feels like WP:PROMO, or WP:NOTDIR. Looked for sources but nothing with WP:SIGCOV - most mention orgs with the same name in other countries.

I have also nominated English Young Liberals, Welsh Young Liberals and Scottish Young Liberals for deletion, if sources could be found they could be redirected to this article however there have been templates seeking verification on this article since 2020. All would be best redirected to Liberal Democrats (UK) Orange sticker (talk) 22:58, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The National League of Young Liberals is a forerunner of the Young Liberals, the NLYL was dissovled in 1988 when the Liberal Party and the Social Democratic Party (SDP) merged. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep youth wings of major political parties at the national level are routinely notable, subnational branches tend to be redirected to the subnational unit level. Simple searching shows multiyear news coverage of the Young Liberals: eg. BBC [3] [4], The Guardian [5], Wales Online [6]. Sarah Pickard's "Politics, Protest and Young People: Political Participation and Dissent in 21st Century Britain" (Palgrave, 2019) has 15-20 references to the Young Liberals, including multi-page analysis (see in particular pp 196-201 which covers the history of youth structures in the current party and its forerunners). WP:NEXIST; no doubt the article could be cleaned up, but that doesn't mean it is not notable. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    All those sources confirm that the organisation exists via trivial mentions, but do they demonstrate that it has had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education as per WP:ORGSIG? Orange sticker (talk) 09:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Notability" is not synonymous with "fame" ... any significant or demonstrable effects (my emphasis). That reliable sources on the subject exist (ie "demonstrable") is the evidence of notability, what they write about it is a content question, not a notability question. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep they do seem to pass our notability guidelines per Goldsztajn's sources, though the article could use a bit of cleanup. SportingFlyer T·C 03:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Welsh Young Liberals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Most sources are not independent or third party, or do not mention subject at all. Could not find WP:SIGCOV. Orange sticker (talk) 22:50, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake (shouldn't rely on my memory!), we generally redirect to the subnational level party unit! Yes, redirect to Welsh Liberal Democrats. Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 09:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Scottish Young Liberals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent, third party sources. Can't find any WP:SIGCOV. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Orange sticker (talk) 22:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake (shouldn't rely on my memory!), we generally redirect to the subnational level party unit! Yes, redirect to Scottish Liberal Democrats. Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 09:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
English Young Liberals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent or third-party sources. Structure section just consists of a list of names which seems like WP:PROMO. Fails WP:GNG. No significant coverage in Google News, one passing mention in Google Books. Orange sticker (talk) 19:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but in dire need of improvement — I would certainly prefer it being kept as opposed to deleted. Failing that I would prefer it be draft-ified or the like.
I had previously stub-ified the artcle by removing vast amounts of content in this edit and here. I was hesitant to do such but believed it to be needed due to verifibility concerns and to avoid a directory article. After that I'd put it on my radar of pages needing additional content.
I believe that EYL scrapes GNG, from a quick gander using the book search, it seems to be mentioned at least in more than one book (Though firefox seems to be preventing me from using preview to look in the books rather annoyingly), though as you said no significant news coverage. I may be mistaken, but I believe the EYL have had some different names in their past as well which may have better coverage, but I'm struggling to recall or pull up what they were (Which doesn't really help the case I suppose).
I'm under no illusion that this isn't a weak case from me however, and I believe you're right to have brought this up Bejakyo (talk) 22:41, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the book mentions may be a reference to National League of Young Liberals which is not the same org Czarking0 (talk) 02:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Orange sticker (talk) 10:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Committee of Concerned Journalists (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Last AfD was 17 years ago with promises to work on the article. I'm not finding significant coverage and with this organization no longer existing unlikely to be any new sources generated. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 15:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Khair University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It does not meet the criteria of WP:ORG or WP:GNG. The article was deleted in 2020 and recreated in 2021, but in my view, the school has not achieved sufficient notability to justify recreating the article. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 02:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kentucky Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a small, single state, third-party in the United States which has as of this nomination only contested a single election. Fails WP:NORG. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, the KYP had nothing to do with Jill Stein besides nominating her. They have bylaws and a notable member with a Wikipedia page (Geoff Young)
Microplastic Consumer (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://thekentuckian.bearblog.dev/ is their website (Young is listed as Party Treasurer) Microplastic Consumer (talk) 00:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Basically we need sources that are substantially about the party. It would also be good to finally determine if the party is "official" or not, and where we can confirm that. Lamona (talk) 18:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Society for Protective Coatings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced for 19 years. A search for sources only yielded industry related press. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 13:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian civil disobedience in the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about an unnotale/unneccesary topic. I don't think there is a need for a Wikipedia article on Libertarian civil disobedience, since there are no similar articles about Conservative or Liberal civil disobidience. SolxrgashiUnited (talk) 12:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Justo Lamas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot find evidence of Lamas' notability as a singer nor for his company which is a worthwhile educational initiative but doesn't appear notable. Coverage appears to be churnalism that is otherwise non independent. There are a lot of hits noting one of the company's artists is performing and some related to someone else of this name, but I cannot find anything of depth. Star Mississippi 04:07, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Residential Cleaning Services International (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Semi-advertorialized article about an organization, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for organizations. As always, organizations are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy coverage about their work in reliable sources to establish their significance -- but this is referenced entirely to primary sourcing that is not support for notability, mostly the organization's own self-published content about itself but also some content self-published by other directly affiliated entities, with not even one GNG-worthy source shown at all. Bearcat (talk) 02:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hearth Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This political party has sources, but seems completely trivial within politics. Ran in the 2024 Turkish local elections and gathered 2000 of 46 million votes. When reaching such an incredibly low level of relevance in politics, it is of no encyclopedic interest which hand gestures they like or how they view Atatürk. Geschichte (talk) 09:41, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 09:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Progressives (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No inherent notability, has little notice from independent sources. No electoral success and has been de-registered by the Australian Electoral Commission for 2 years Flat Out (talk) 23:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Dearth of reliable sources, political parties are not inherently notable. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:17, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or possibly Rescope, though you could argue WP:TNT in this case, I think that if the article has been nominated three times, but never got deleted, that speaks to me that this article doesn't meet quality guidelines. Madeline1805 (talk) 14:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If one time was no consensus and one time was keep - that would indicate the previous consensus in both cases was *not* to delete. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 02:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There were arguments from multiple editors in previous discussions which were clearly in the opposite direction of our notability guidelines. TarnishedPathtalk 03:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amadeus Capital Partners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP. Insufficient WP:ORGCRIT sources to prove notability. Imcdc Contact 11:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hydra Ventures (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP.Insufficient WP:ORGCRIT sources.

Edit: @WikiOriginal-9:, you withdrew the nomination last time. Do you have any comments on whether or not this article should be deleted?

Imcdc Contact 08:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pump Aid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An article based on 2 sources. There's 9 google news hits but on closer inspection most of these are not WP:SIGCOV that would meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 05:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 06:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 09:25, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree with ResonantDistortion's logic Czarking0 (talk) 15:45, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some of the sources are marginal/local (e.g., Wigan Today, BBC Radio 4 appeal) but the Guardian, New Scientist, and Daily Telegraph articles seem sufficient to establish GNG. Oblivy (talk) 06:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fisheries Society of Bangladesh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searches of the usual types in English and Bengali found press releases and directory listings, but no significant coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources. The society's work may be good and important, especially to those connected with it, but the organization is not notable (not a suitable topic for a stand alone Wikipedia article). Worldbruce (talk) 13:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways (talk) 23:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

[edit]

Categories

[edit]