Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organizations

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:

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.
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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Organizations deletion

Tennis West State League

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

Mentions, Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Was moved from AfC after being rejected twice, without improvement. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Tennis and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Committee for Support to the Reconstruction of the Party (Marxist–Leninist)

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

I have fixed the link to the Portuguese article but that only has one cite whereas to show notability multiple cites are normally required Chidgk1 (talk) 11:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Portugal. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Communist Electoral Front (Marxist–Leninist)

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

Apparently Portuguese Marxist–Leninist Communist Organization is its alternate name and we already have an article for them Chidgk1 (talk) 11:51, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Portugal. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:51, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Communist Party of the Valencian Country – Revolutionary Marxist

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

Either a duplicate of Communist Party of the Valencian Country or not notable Chidgk1 (talk) 12:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Spain. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Knights of the Holy Eucharist

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

Doesn't seem to have any really independent sources, indicating a lack of notability.

First source: "The Knights paid a modest amount for the writing and promotion of this article"
Second source", journalist: "In addition to working with the Knights of the Holy Eucharist (knights.org)[...]"
Third source is informing that the bishop (head of the diocese) is working with the Knight

and so on, a mixture of seemingly unreliable partisan sources (Catholic Online), non-independent sources (EWTN), contact information, ...

This seems to be a local organisation of just 12 people in 2016[1], not some large organization spread across the US or multiple countries. Fram (talk) 10:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Christianity, and Nebraska. Shellwood (talk) 12:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Most of the Catholic media would of course have an association with the org discussed here, but I'd still consider them independent, as they have editorial control over what they publish. Otherwise, I didn't find anything (sourcing seems to be only in religious/Catholic media). Oaktree b (talk) 13:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But even within the Catholic media, which ones do you consider to have reliable, notable, independent coverage of this group? First three sources at least don't qualify, which ones do? Most seem to be from the diocese of Lincoln, which is the diocese working together with the Knights (see source 3). Fram (talk) 13:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

International Coordination of Revolutionary Parties and Organizations

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

Since this article was created in 2011, it has been based almost entirely on citations to sources either from the ICOR itself or from its affiliate members. Attempts to find coverage in reliable secondary source turned up very little. Neither of the cited secondary sources in this article provide significant coverage, only giving the ICOR a passing reference in the wider context of another subject. A cursory Google Scholar search brought up a few self-published Marxist word documents, and one book about German political parties that only mentions the ICOR in passing.

As I have been unable to find significant coverage of this international organisation in reliable sources, and as notability is not inherited from any of its affiliated organisations, I do not think this meets the notability criteria for organisations and am nominating it for deletion. Grnrchst (talk) 09:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Morocco, South Africa, Tunisia, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Iran, India, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and United States of America. Grnrchst (talk) 09:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I believe there may be a language / coverage issue, as this is English Wikipedia, and there are two or three English-speaking organizations within ICOR. I will look into it this week. Castroonthemoon (talk) 21:43, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Most online sources I found were either non-independent or were not in-depth. The one book cited in the article was written by Stefan Engel, former chairman of the MLPD, a member organization of ICOR. Kovcszaln6 (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

International Boxing Federation Muaythai

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

The subject fails to meet the guidelines for WP:GNG and WP:NCORP due to a lack of significant coverage from independent, reliable sources. The existing sources do not discuss the subject in depth or in length, and they do not meet the verification requirements. Currently, the available sources are either not independent or not reliable. If anyone can provide independent, reliable sources in the Thai language, please do so, and we will review them to determine if they meet the necessary criteria. At this time, we are unable to locate the required sources. Please note that sources from social media, organizations, institutions, foundations, private companies, or any other entities connected to the subject, as well as interview articles, are considered unreliable and/or not independent and cannot be used to satisfy the notability requirements. Cassiopeia talk 08:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Cassiopeia talk 08:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Martial arts and Thailand. Shellwood (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The current and also other available online sources clearly state the subject is not notable and covered (Sigcov, not trivial occasional or dependent coverage).Uni44hossiq (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland women's national under-16 basketball team

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

Simply a results listing. Almost all the sources are primary from FIBA. LibStar (talk) 04:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Basketball and Ireland. LibStar (talk) 04:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. However, sources must be worked on a bit.. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 04:54, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. There is enough extensive coverage on the web. (online newspapers) All you have to do is some research. BiggySmoov (talk) 06:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While, as with all other titles in the Category:Women's national under-16 basketball teams category, this title was primarily based on primary/NOTSTATS sources, my own WP:BEFORE identified (and I have added) a number of independent sources which deal with the subject in at least some depth. Not a "slam dunk" (no pun intended) but outright deletion doesn't seem an appropriate (or consistent) outcome here. (At the very least there should perhaps be some discussion on AtDs. Including redirection to Basketball Ireland or similar.) Guliolopez (talk) 18:53, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Movement for the Unity of the Communists

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

Article topic fails WP:ORG. Tried to find reliable, English- and Portuguese-language sources online but did not. The organisation existing only in 2005 means there may be print sources I do not have access to, but given this splinter group existed for less than a month, I doubt that is the case. Yue🌙 02:56, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Brazil. Yue🌙 02:56, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article fails WP:ORG and has only one somewhat questionable source. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 03:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 08:11, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society

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

Upon review, no reliable sources could be found that are independent of the source and contain relevant factual information. Subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG. Nixleovel (talk) 21:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Biology, Geography, and Ireland. Nixleovel (talk) 21:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no WP:SIGCOV. Plus, the society itself doesn't even have an article. GoldRomean (talk) 01:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Party (Peru)

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

https://repositoriodigital.bnp.gob.pe/bnp/recursos/2/html/el-estado-en-la-sombra/36/ has been suggested but I have not found enough other sources to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 19:25, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Peru. Chidgk1 (talk) 19:25, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Nicolás de Piérola if the source supports that he founded the party. I can't read Spanish nor can I translate the page you linked in the book. If the source doesn't support a merge and redirect, then delete. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 19:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - alternative redirect target would be to the Peruvian resistance movement in the War of the Pacific. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a machine translation of the Spanish Wikipedia's description of this party in its article on Peru's Democratic Party at es:Partido Demócrata (Perú)#Fundación
- After resigning the government in November 1881, Piérola left for Europe, but before that organized the bases of a national party in Lima, to unify the political forces of Peru (February 5, 1882). In addition to the founder, the Central Steering Committee of this party was composed of Antonio Arenas, Aurelio García y García, Rufino Torrico, José Antonio de Lavalle and Lino Alarco, and had as secretaries Manuel Pablo Olaechea, Ricardo Palma, Eduardo Villena and Arturo García. This National Party, of ephemeral duration, is the immediate antecedent of the Democratic Party."
Peru was occupied by Chile at this time. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Comment. I'm struggling to make sense of the sources, to the point that I can't even figure how many 19th-century Peruvian political parties were named the Partido Nacional. One source refers to a Partido Nacional from the 1870s that supported Mariano Ignacio Prado and was a "third way" between the Civilista Party and the supporters of Nicolás de Piérola (pg 160-161). A second source recognizes the Partido Nacional as opposing Piérola. A third source talks about the Partido Nacional being an important force in the 1870s, "imploding" after the War of the Pacific (pg 39), then giving rise to Piérola's Partido Demócrata (pg 47). A fourth source states that A inicios de 1882, se fundó el Partido Nacional que reunía a diversas figuras del pierolismo [At the beginning of 1882, the National Party was founded, which united diverse figures within Pierolismo]. This doesn't match up with the three aforementioned sources, but it does match the source presented by Chidgk1, which states that the Partido Nacional was founded in early 1882 by "elements close to Piérola". Maybe someone else would have better luck sorting this one out? PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 23:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I machine-translated the link that Chidgk1 provided above. It discusses the machinations of various politicians aligned with Nicolás de Piérola and against the collaborationist Provisional President of Peru, Francisco García Calderón, during the Chilean occupation of Peru. The Spanish Wikipedia article I quoted above summarizes this paper's description of the Party pretty well - it was basically a collection of Piérola associates and "ephemeral" in duration. Not much of a real party, in other words.

The paper is not about the National Party per se but rather the maneuvering. It could be used to maybe establish a weak notability. It's telling that the Spanish Wikipedia covers this period in detail but only mentions this National Party in passing. The party does not have an article.

I suggest we redirect this article to Peruvian resistance movement in the War of the Pacific and merge the material I quoted above from the Spanish Wikipedia to a small, new section on political developments in the resistance article. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 00:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iran transition government

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

Everything here that mentions the government is a primary source from the transitional government itself, or a related Iranian diaspora organization. There are no secondary sources for things besides statements from Pahlavi.

Source analysis:

1 is a Twitter link.
2 is a diaspora Iranian organization, primary source.
3 is the closest thing here to a secondary source, but also fails to establish this as a clear new government, if anything it provides notability for an article called "Munich Convergence Meeting" rather than the government. The article itself states that the meeting did not intend to "launch a new organization."
4 talks about the conference but doesn't mention the government.
5 to 19 are all either Twitter links, or reliable sources that discuss Reza Pahlavi's statements, but do not actually discuss the transitional government.
20 to 27 are primary sources from the government themselves.
28 to 34 again, are news articles discussing Pahlavi and the prospect of regime change.

In short, there are no secondary sources that establish the transitional government is notable, and no news articles that even mention it existing. As such I don't think it meets notability guidelines. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 17:17, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to note that a single news article (from a secondary source) that elaborates on what the transition government actually is would likely at least establish it exists, its just that everything listed so far either is a primary source or a news article of Pahlavi saying that he has a "transition plan" which is distinct from the fully fledged organization described in this article. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 17:24, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Iran. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete* as premature and not noteworthy as evidenced by the lack of RS on the subject.65.229.28.177 (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is fairly common for Wikipedia to have articles about governments in exile, (such as Ukraine Salvation Committee, Free Joseon and Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam) and for self-proclaimed alternative governments, (such as Government of Peace and Unity and Government of National Stability and the Revolutionary Government of the Republic of Indonesia). Therefore I see no reason why a government in exile / alternative government being formed for Iran by a prominent member of the Iranian royal house should not warrant such an article.Dn9ahx (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: I wouldn't reject notability entirely as it is quite often discussed among opposition groups especially with recent events. I do though have some hesitancy about a full article since it's mostly proposals at this time and not any institutional government right now (PM, cabinet, etc). Because of this, I think the material in the article should be transferred over to the Iranian opposition page, and it can separate out as an article in the future if an actual transitional government is formed. TeddyRoosevelt1912 (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep (note that I wrote the article): The topic is very notable and naturally governments in exile of non Anglo-Saxon countries tend to be covered mainly by diaspora newspapers in their native languages. That’s why many of the sources are non English and come from diaspora based outlets. This particular government in exile is in formation since February and has grown particularly relevant following the Iran Israel war. Overall I wholeheartedly agree with Dn9ahx KiltedKangaroo (talk) 08:11, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article topic is notable, it just needs better sources and perhaps a rewrite. MaggieT19 (talk) 09:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: After looking through the sources again, I've decided to support deletion—there just isn't enough substantial coverage to justify a standalone article. MaggieT19 (talk) 10:56, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Dn9ahx Mahan (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTALBALL. If the threshold for notability is coverage by diaspora groups and media, then any opposition or separatist movement could have a "transition government" article for some hypothetical future. Should there be a Chinese transitional government article or US dictatorship article just because some authors in reliable sources have speculated on these topics? No, of course not, per WP:CRYSTALBALL. A claimed exile government is different in that it at least exists, but having an article dedicated to a transitional government that is merely speculative seems WP:TOOSOON. Yue🌙 18:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Campaign for Nationalism in Scotland

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

I searched and https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v43/n05/colin-kidd/new-unions-for-old might be a source but that is not enough to show notability Chidgk1 (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Scotland. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The Campaign for Nationalism in Scotland was a short-lived faction within the SNP in the early 1980s with no lasting impact or independent coverage. --THE ONE PEOPLE (talk) 19:32, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People's Democratic Temperance League

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

Article has only 2 cites - I think there ought to be 3 good cites to show it is notable - people in Finland may know offline cites? Chidgk1 (talk) 19:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Finland. Chidgk1 (talk) 19:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - there's no policy or guideline requiring three good sources to establish notability. WP:THREE is just a redirect to one user's opinion: User:RoySmith/Three best sources. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This news article from the article gives an in-depth look at the party:
- "Hyvän elämäntavan jäljillä" (PDF). Kansan Uutiset Viikkolehti (Supplement) (in Finnish). 21 March 2014. Retrieved 22 June 2025.
I think it's sufficient to build an article on. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 01:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article's other ref cites a Finnish humanities academic portal, Agricola; the link is dead. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The link works for me, so perhaps there is some geographical limitation. The ref is a review of Työväen raittiusliike sata vuotta: hyvien elämäntapojen jäljillä (2014), a general history of temperance movement in Finland. The ref itself does not discuss KDRL in depth: it mentions the split, but not much more. However, the book is likely to contain a more comprehensive history of KDRL. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 07:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I set my vpn to Finland I can see that link otherwise not. Google translates the paragraph as:

“Obtaining funding certainly guided the change in direction of the temperance movement at least in the 1980s. When municipal temperance appropriations were directed to purchasing services, temperance organizations became service providers. For example, the People's Democratic Temperance League maintained a Companion Phone, where people could call, among other things, about their substance abuse problems. The service served as an alternative to similar services offered by parishes. Money for initiatives and projects was received from RAY.” Chidgk1 (talk) 11:33, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The other paragraph directly discussing KDRL is: In 1948, the communist temperance movement established its central organization, the People's Temperance Work Center. When the central organization fell into the hands of the Taistolaiset in 1974 under the name People's Temperance League, those supporting the party's majority faction founded their own central organization, the People's Democratic Temperance League. Until its merger into the Finnish Lifestyle Association ELO in 1993, there were three leftist temperance movement central organizations operating: one for the Social Democrats, one for the majority Communists, and one for the Taistolaiset. Since 2012, labor movement-based temperance organizations have operated together with other temperance organizations under a common organization, EHYT ry. The key driving force behind the mergers of temperance organizations in both 1993 and 2012 were the wishes and guidelines of the funding organization RAY during financially tight times. Other parts provide the relevant context. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 11:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AStA

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

Needs at least one cite to prove that it is not just the German phrase for “student union”. The German article linked to Students' union also seems to lack cites. I don’t know enough about Germany to know one way or the other. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Germany. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the German Wikipedia article is, in fact, loaded with citations; see de:Allgemeiner Studierendenausschuss#Einzelnachweise. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mean that de:Studierendenvertretung lacks cites Chidgk1 (talk) 11:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep many citations are available event without paywalls. Der Spiegel news article almost 20 years old is a truly reliable and is broadly overviewing the topic. https://www.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/uni/rudis-reste-rampe-du-bist-asta-a-388678.html and some others. --J. P. Fridrich (talk) 04:34, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mamaison Hotels & Residences

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

Article created by WP:SPA. References provided do not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG, as these are all directly from the company itself. Unable to locate significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. C 679 10:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Czech Republic, and Hungary. C 679 10:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Travel and tourism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as purely promotional. Jdcooper (talk) 13:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ISO/TC 262

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

Not finding WP:SIGCOV in independent sources; my WP:BEFORE search turns up plenty of non-independent sources (e.g. [2][3]), but nothing substantial. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:44, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:52, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Power-Packer

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

Does not meet WP:ORG. I could find no significant coverage by independent sources. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Transportation, and Netherlands. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (selectively) into its parent Enerpac Tool Group as an ATD. gidonb (talk) 17:09, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Enerpac Tool Group, but this is a bit of a mess. Together, those articles both reflect likely COI and have next to no encyclopedic content or value. I'm not entirely sure Enerpac Tool Group should be kept either (see WP:LISTED). FalconK (talk) 01:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I believe Enerpac should also be merged into Enerpac Tool Group, the combined article should be cleaned up and moved to Enerpac. Terrible fragmentation here. By pulling all these companies together, NCORP is met. gidonb (talk) 02:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erie County Democratic Committee

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

I've never seen a Wikipedia page for a county party before, and this specific one doesn't seem especially notable. All cited sources are political/election reporting that just happen to mention the county party. I don't really see anything on this page that would make the Erie County Democratic Committee more notable than any other local party affiliate in one of the 3,244 counties in the US. The section on Joseph F. Crangle and James D. Griffin is interesting, I suppose, but they both have their own pages where that information can be parked. This page could possibly be redirected to Erie County, New York or New York State Democratic Party. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 15:14, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 15:29, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm seeing sources explicitly about the committee, it's activities, and the infighting going on in its history (especially so in the section on the most recent history which was removed, despite it being properly sourced and having a large amount of references even more explicitly about the conflicts going on within the committee). The sources aren't just about actual political races in elections, but often articles about political appointments in the committee and the conflicts therein. Which seems to me to make the committee itself notable and information about its history is better situated here than spread across multiple other articles involving each of the several notable people who have been a part of its history. Also, your first statement is very wrong. There are a number of county party articles, the most prominent of which is Brooklyn Democratic Party. Silver seren^C 15:30, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As an example, you have everything from very recent articles on political controversies with the committee to much older pieces from 1868 about the committee. So there's a ton of history and sources to pull from. I honestly think the article currently is underbaked, there's a lot more, especially in book sources and specialized newspaper databases like Newspapers.com that can be pulled from to make this history even more in-depth and comprehensive. Silver seren^C 15:45, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There's a long political history of Erie County that was/is involved in US Federal politics, the assassination of McKinley in particular. I'm not sure the Democratic portion of the Erie County party is particularly notable... I can really only find rather routine mentions of candidates or politicians. Oaktree b (talk) 17:29, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: Kings County Democratic County Committee, Kings County Republican Party, New York County Democratic Committee, Queens County Republican Party, and Westchester County Democratic Committee are all county parties within New York State - so stating there's not a precedent is incorrect. TheNewMinistry (talk) 20:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, this is the creator of the article. And that's a bit of a different situation given that those are the parties in New York City, the largest city in the country. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:30, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo is the second-largest city in New York State, and Erie County has roughly the same population as Westchester County - which is not part of New York City proper. TheNewMinistry (talk) 22:19, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or draftify While it's possible for local party organizations to be notable, the sources here are generally news pieces about people involved or routine local activities rather than the committee more broadly. I think a better focus on significant aspects of its history with dedicated sources that don't make it feel like a refbomb would be helpful, but when it's mainly just a listing of who served as chairmen, I don't see justification for an article here. Erie County, New York#County government and politics and Politics and government of Buffalo, New York are also excellent places for discussion about how they've been involved with politics that could use some of this type of info. Reywas92^Talk 21:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Except when addressing an article in an AfD, you're meant to discuss the topic and its notability as a whole. Not the current state of the article. You've acknowledged here the existence of sources on the general history of the committee. Furthermore, with your last sentence, shouldn't you be voting for Merge instead for this subject? Silverseren^C 21:53, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure, it could be read as selective merge, but honestly, I don't believe much of the content here, which, again, is mainly just listings of who was chairman when, should be included in that. If there is more in-depth coverage about what the committee actually did, then those should be added to those articles. I don't see notability as a whole with these sources.
  I thought the line "The committee became fractured between Griffin's conservative South Buffalo loyalists, and the liberal base" was interesting, but the source only says "The anti-Griffin opposition has splintered..." without any discussion of the county committee. Reading through more of them, I see very little independent substance about the organization rather than just who was chair. — Reywas92^Talk 22:35, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  I agree that needs a better source. If you're interested in the topic of how South Buffalo politics branched off from the rest of the city, this is an excellent article from 2002 - “Dave Franczyk, Racism and a Divided Council”:
  
  This is the legacy that former mayor Jimmy Griffin gave to Buffalo. Election after election saw Griffin running against black candidates. The subtle message to white voters, including those who did not particularly like Griffin, was that Jimmy Griffin was their last line of defense against blacks, who were poised to take over the city (as if politics was a sort of black vs. white football game). This was obvious from start in 1978, when Arthur Eve beat Jimmy Griffin in the Democratic Primary for Mayor. Griffin came back in November on the Conservative line in a racially driven campaign whose aftershocks we still feel today. Stop signs throughout South Buffalo and white sections of the East Side were stenciled into “Stop Eve” signs. Griffin forces made a monumental effort to churn out the votes in these same areas. The message was clear. Voters weren’t coming out to support Griffin. They were coming out to vote against the black man. All of Griffin’s subsequent elections saw him matched up in similar Democratic primary battles. TheNewMinistry (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Erie County Democratic Committee is not mentioned anywhere in this paragraph. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As a 14-year member of the equivalent committee in Albany County, I shouldn't !vote. However, I think that larger and dominant county committees and political machines are usually more notable than state committees. There appears in any case to be significant coverage, but that's the community's decision. Bearian (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right - and there's often been times when county chairs have simultaneously held the New York State committee chair, giving their counties a specific edge over the rest of the state in power. Joseph F. Crangle was simultaneously both state chair and the chairman of Erie County's Democratic Committee from 1971 to 1974. More recently, Byron Brown served as state chair from 2016 to 2019 while he was mayor of Buffalo. TheNewMinistry (talk) 17:40, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michigan Townships Association

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

Disclosure, I just rev-del'ed significant portion as a copyright violation and because this was already once tagged for CSD, I think it needs more than PROD. I can find actions the association took and naming of officers, but no ORG level sourcing to establish notability and no viable ATD. Star Mississippi 03:06, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, United States of America, and Michigan. Star Mississippi 03:06, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This does not seem to meet notability, and the type of organization that it has does not seem to merit notability on a general level. PickleG13 (talk) 04:26, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I added some references. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 08:17, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest merge into Administrative divisions of Michigan#Township as there is really apparently very little to say about it other than it exists and has nearly every township in the state as a member. Mangoe (talk) 01:19, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Material Sciences Corporation

AfDs for this article:

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

N/C in 2017, and I think it's time for another look as corp depth still does not appear to be there in WP:SIRS Star Mississippi 03:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Companies, Technology, United States of America, and Michigan. Star Mississippi 03:01, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete All of the sources are very normal corporate business sources, not ones that establish notability by Wikipedia standards. PickleG13 (talk) 04:26, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. "Profile: Material Sciences Corporation". Noise & Vibration Worldwide. 38 (7). Sage Publishing: 21–22. July 2007. doi:10.1260/0957-4565.38.7.21. EBSCOhost 26045472.
  According to this page, Noise & Vibration Worldwide is a peer-reviewed journal. The article notes: "Material Sciences Corporation provides material-based solutions for acoustical and coating applications that address noise, temperature problems in the automotive, HVAC, electronics, power equipment, and construction industries. Founded in 1971 the company now has 600 employees in the US, Europe, and Asia and a network of partners on four continents. In fiscal 2006, MSC had net sales of $287 million and net income of $5.2 million. MSC has one of the largest independent sound engineering laboratories in North America, an application research centre located in Canton, MI."
2. Nelson, Brett (2003-01-24). "Shhh! Struggling Material Sciences is betting its future on a dated feat of metallurgy called "quiet" steel. Your Ford pickup may have it". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2025-06-05. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "In April, 17 years in upper management at Quaker Oats, Whirl-pool and FMC Corp., the jovial, 64-year-old Michael Callahan gave up retirement and the occasional consulting gig to run a sleepy manufacturer that last year netted $2.2 million pretax on $267 million in sales. Material Sciences Corp. of Elk Grove Village, Ill. was formed in 1971 to buy companies inventing new materials. Most never took off, but it managed to go public in 1984 on the back of a unit that had found a fast way to paint the raw steel and aluminum used to make car bodies, roofing and garage doors. Coil coating–which involves priming metal rolls weighing up to 50,000 pounds with absorbent chemicals, then painting them at up to 700 feet per minute on a mill–accounts for two-thirds of the company’s revenues. ... Mat Sci’s big break didn’t come until 1998 when it began supplying the steel firewall between the dashboard and the engine for the 1999 Ford Explorer Sport Trac pickup truck. That win helped land a contract for the same part, and another one for a quiet-steel oil pan, on Ford’s new F-150 pickup. Today the company has contracts at each of the Big Three and is pursuing more than 150 new auto deals. ... As for competition, Material Sciences is far and away the dominant supplier of damped steel for autos–perhaps a $600 million market."
3. Nelson, Brett (2000-10-30). "So What's Your Story?". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2025-06-05. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "Directions aren’t always necessary. Chicago-based Material Sciences Corp., a $500 million (sales) maker of laminated metal and films, had eight analysts following it in 1995. Only two remain. A nasty confluence of missed earnings, brokerage attrition and shrinking market cap (now $170 million) took its toll. Publicly traded since 1984, Material Sciences has spent $1 million on promotional help over the past five years, to no effect. Perhaps shedding the money losing steel-galvanizing line–and focusing solely on profitable products such as anti-vibrational-steel car components and window films that reject solar heat–will spark Wall Street’s interest."
4. Englander, David (2013-04-03). "Primed for "Material" Gains". Barron's. Archived from the original on 2017-03-22. Retrieved 2025-06-21.
  The article notes: "With a market cap of $104 million, and only two sell-side analysts covering its stock, Material Sciences floats under the radar of most investors. Material Sciences (ticker: MASC) makes specialty materials, primarily for the automotive industry. Its metal coatings are used on car bodies and parts. The company is perhaps best known for its Quiet Steel product, which reduces noise and vibrations in cars and appliances. In the last year, Material Sciences hit a rough patch. Sales have declined, due to lower shipments of metal fuel tanks, as Ford has converted some of its vehicles to plastic tanks. ... Based in Elk Grove Village, Ill., Material Sciences' sales are roughly split between its acoustical materials like Quiet Steel and Quiet Aluminum, and its coated metal products, which include electrogalvanized materials, as well as ElectroBrite, an alternative to stainless steel in appliances. Major customers include U.S. Steel, Chrysler and Ford."
5. Dinger, Ed (2004). "Material Sciences Corporation". In Grant, Tina (ed.). International Directory of Company Histories. Vol. 64. Detroit, Michigan: St. James Press. ISBN 1558625666. Archived from the original on 2025-06-05. Retrieved 2025-06-21 – via Encyclopedia.com.
  From Cengage.com:
  When students, job candidates, business executives, historians and investors need accurate and detailed information on the development of any of the world's largest and most influential companies, direct them to International Directory of Company Histories. This multi-volume work is the first major reference to bring together histories of companies that are a leading influence in a particular industry or geographic location.
  The book notes:
  Public Company
  Incorporated: 1971
  Employees: 740
  Sales: $266.8 million (2003)
  Stock Exchanges: New York
  Ticker Symbol: MSC
  NAIC: 332812 Metal Coating, Engraving (Except Jewelry and Silverware), and Allied Services to Manufacturers
  
  Material Sciences Corporation (MSC) is a publicly traded company based in Elk Grove, Illinois. It designs, manufactures, and markets materials-based solutions for electronic, acoustical/thermal, and coated metal applications. MSC's metal laminate product, NRGDamp, is used in the electronics industry to reduce noise and vibrations in hard disk drives. The company also produces Quiet Steel, used by the auto industry to reduce noise and vibration. The material has been applied primarily in dash panels but is also being used in an increasing number of other applications such as wheel wells and floor pans. In addition, MSC's high-speed coated metal operation produces painted and electrogalvanized sheet metal for use in building and construction products, automobile exterior panels, and appliances such as refrigerators and freezers. MSC also makes sensors and switches, relying on its patented field effect technology, for the automotive, recreational vehicle, marine, and consumer electronics markets.
  
  Founding the Company in 1971
  
  MSC was founded in 1971 as a holding company to acquire businesses involved in advanced materials technologies. The most important of these companies, and the only one in the fold when the company went public in 1984, was Pre Finish Metals. It was originally known as All Weather Steel Products, founded in Chicago in 1951 by Roy Crabtree. The company started out applying protective aluminum paint to sheets of metal, used to make air ducts for heating and air conditioning systems. The demand for the product grew so rapidly that All Weather soon dropped sheet processing in favor of continuous coil coating. In 1954 the operation was transferred to a converted mushroom barn in Des Plaines, Illinois, where new coil processing equipment was installed to meet ever increasing demand. Then, in May 1958, sawdust insulation in the roof ignited spontaneously and the subsequent explosion and fire completely destroyed the building. All Weather's management took immediate steps to establish a new production facility and preserve the company's customer base. Three competitors agreed to fill outstanding orders, with All Weather's personnel dispatched to oversee production. ...
  The book provides extensive discussion of the subject.
6. International Directory of Company Histories also provides a "Further Reading" section that provides more sources about Material Sciences Corporation:
  Arndorfer, James B., "Gabelli Groups Turn Up Heat on Metal Firms," Crain's Chicago Business, June 2, 2003, p. 3.
  Keefe, Lisa M., "Metal Firm Is Up for Sale," Crain's Chicago Business, July 2, 1990, p. 70.
  Murphy, H. Lee, "Bad Timing Snarls Material Sci. Deal," Crain Chicago Business, July 19, 1999, p. 36.
  Nelson, Brett, "Shhh!," Forbes, November 24, 2003, p. 84.
  Savitz, Eric J., "A Fresh Shine," Barron's, November 4, 1991, p. 14.
  Setton, Dolly, "Steel Deal," Forbes, October 18, 1999, p. 190.
  Troxell, Thomas N., Jr., "Tripod for Growth," Barron's, July 1, 1985, p. 33.
7. Hoover's had an industry report about Material Sciences Corporation under a paywall at http://www.hoovers.com/company-information/cs/company-report.material_sciences_corporation.f622bdcf9e26730a.html. The summary notes: "Material Sciences Corporation, known as MSC, makes engineered materials, as well as coated steel and electro-galvanized steel products. MSC has two primary product segments: acoustical (anti-noise and vibration products, including the trademarked Quiet Steel reduced vibration metal) and coated (decorative and protective metal coatings). The company's products are used by the appliance, automotive, building systems, computer, construction, furniture, HVAC, lighting, and telecommunications industries. Automobile manufacturers are among the company's largest clients. MSC gets most of its sales in the US."
  Hoover's lists a sample report about Exxon at http://www.hoovers.com/content/dam/english/dnb-solutions/general-company-research/69-exxon-hooversreport.pdf that discusses Exxon's "Company Description" and "Company History" in detail. Similar coverage Material Sciences Corporation in Hoover's industry report about it would provide significant coverage of the Material Sciences Corporation.
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Material Sciences Corporation to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite torn on this one, but are you volunteering to fix the article and add something beyond numbers and timelines of announcements? Your rebuttal to the proposal to delete this is at least one order of magnitude longer than the article. FalconK (talk) 01:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Western Indiana Community Foundation

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

While this local-ish nonprofit in Indiana seems to do good work, I don't think this meet WP:GNG or WP:NORG. What sourcing I can turn up is either passing mentions, not independent, or otherwise not contributing to notability. There are issues with promotional tone in the article ("It is a combination of all these basic characteristics that makes WICF a true community foundation, although there are other types of community organizations in Fountain and Vermillion County that have some of these characteristics.") and this has been tagged as unsourced for several years. I just don't see a GNG or NORG pass here. Hog Farm _Talk 00:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Indiana. Hog Farm _Talk 00:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Corpus Christi Catholic Church, Wokingham

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

Not seeing any independent WP:SIGCOV leading to a WP:GNG pass for this local Catholic parish church. Sources in the article include non-independent sites (parish webpage, parish newsletter, schooll webpage, the diocesan website [4], [5]), the WP:UGC GenUKI (see [Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_298#Royalcruft_again]); WP:PRIMARYSOURCE directory pages ([6], [7]); and a WP:TRIVIALMENTION ([8]. A WP:BEFORE search turns up many more directory listings and trivial mentions (example) but nothing we can work with for notability. Open to a redirect to Roman Catholic Diocese of Portsmouth but bringing it to AfD for that consensus since a draftification was contested with the addition of non-qualifying sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Christianity, and England. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete as a run-of-the-mill parish. I wouldn't redirect to the diocese as there is no list of parishes. Mangoe (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Illinois ODP

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

Creator seriously removing speedy deletion tags on article created by themselves, Article generally looks promotional, fails WP:GNG fails to have significant coverage, not properly writings, lacks inline citations. Allblessed (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Sports. Allblessed (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This program is not a promotional piece or a non-notable subject. It is a state affiliate of U.S. Youth Soccer and has produced multiple players who went on to compete at the professional and international level—including Olympic medalists like Casey Krueger. The article is being actively revised to remove any non-neutral language and to include coverage from independent and reliable sources.

If you feel parts of the article were too close to promotional or lacked sufficient citations, that’s a fair concern—but it’s something that can be improved through editing rather than deletion. Milicz (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ and keep on improving. Nominator is right that the article could be improved, so I have tagged the article accordingly with the issues they have identified (more and better references needed, needs to be revised to be more neutral in tone, likely contains original research). I have also added {{citation needed}} tags throughout, and added a reference and confirmed that there is other significant coverage that could be added (via ProQuest). In any case, the reasons given essentially amount to an argument to delete because cleanup is required, and this is invalid per WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP. (Even though the desire for cleanup is appreciated.) Furthermore, there is no mention of any WP:BEFORE search. Strongly advise nominator to gain more experience in reading Wikipedia guidelines and editing in their areas of competence before nominating more articles for deletion. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:25, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you see [9] there is likely a possible COI, tho I’m still checking, my issue is why the creator keeps removing tags, moving articles back to mainspace, creator lacks experience and temperament. Also can you show me how that article meets WP:SIGCOV? Allblessed (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
your comment that I “lack experience and temperament” falls afoul of Wikipedia’s civility and personal-attack policies. Per WP:CIVIL (“avoid personal attacks”) and WP:AGF (“assume good faith”), we’re encouraged to critique content, not contributors. I’ve been an editor for over 21 years and remain committed to improving this article. If you have concerns about neutrality, sourcing, or structure, please point to specific passages or sources so we can address them together. Milicz (talk) 18:10, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milicz Point taken. It is kind of you to defend the nominator and to ask for specific feedback. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to address tone, and have added citations or removed claims I could not find proper citations for. Added ProQuest citations. Thank you for your suggestions Milicz (talk) 18:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. First of all, it is very clear to me that neither of the tagged criteria for speedy deletion (A7 and G11) apply. A before search, which appears to have not been performed by the nominator, shows there is at least some indication of significance. G11 requires the article to be exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles (emphasis included in policy). Cleanup is required but not to the point that the article is not salvageable. Much of the content is unsourced and the references there are not great. Most are either not independent or are player profiles with one-line mentions of the subject program. Moving to draftspace will allow any interested user to build the article up to encyclopedic standards before moving it back into mainspace. Frank Anchor 13:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Olympics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:17, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - poorly sourced, promotional article written by SPA - they've also written similar topic Illinois Youth Soccer Association. Giant Snowman 10:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Suggesting that my article must be self-promotional because “someone involved in ODP” wrote it is an ad hominem circumstantial (genetic) fallacy: it rejects the content based solely on an assumed motive or origin rather than evaluating the article’s actual sourcing and neutrality. I have zero involvement in that organization and am still researching it.

For context, this article emerged directly from the research conducted to answer the community question in Chicago: “Is Illinois ODP still worth it? Does it genuinely help with college recruitment?” You’ll see that the article:

Notes ODP’s changing reputation, including that it has lost some of its earlier luster rather than presenting it as the undisputed pinnacle of development programs.

Cites independent coverage—local newspaper articles, US Youth Soccer annual reports, and academic analyses—rather than relying on press releases or self-published claims.

Maintains a neutral tone, focusing on verifiable facts about the program’s history, selection process, and outcomes.

If there are specific passages you feel remain promotional or poorly sourced, I’m happy to rewrite them or add better citations. I’m committed to meeting WP:NEUTRAL and WP:RS standards, so please let me know any additional reliable sources I should include. Milicz (talk) 15:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to U.S. Youth Soccer Olympic Development Program. This fails notability for organizations. There is simply not enough significant coverage in reliable sources to warrant an individual article for this org. Citing affiliated clubs is not independent. I mean Reddit is referenced despite our policy on Reddit. Two incidental mentions in the Chicago Tribune and sporadic mentions in the context of high school player plays soccer in regional newspapers does not cut it. --Mpen320 (talk) 17:39, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The citation to Reddit was for the "Criticisms and challenges portion" and is not used to support any of the facts or notability. Milicz (talk) 15:12, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. Please read WP:RSREDDIT. You should not be using it as a citation at all.--Mpen320 (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Articles about things you like are not necessarily good things. --Mpen320 (talk) 17:41, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who says I like Illinois ODP? Article itself emerged directly from the research conducted to answer the community question in Chicago: “Is Illinois ODP still worth it? Does it genuinely help with college recruitment?” As you can see (if you read it), that's an open question. Milicz (talk) 15:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. I am not accusing anyone of anything. I have started linking to that essay in AfDs because there is a subset of editors who think a Wikipedia article is a badge of honor and spend a lot of time trying to keep articles that should not exist. I could just as easily assume you hated ODP and wanted to create an attack page for this organization or that you are just very, very into youth soccer.--Mpen320 (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Striking my earlier !vote. Leaning either draftify or redirect to U.S. Youth Soccer Olympic Development Program; this article absolutely cannot be kept as is. Milicz You can't cite other Wikipedia articles. See WP:CIRCULAR. You need to remove all those citations you've added to other Wikipedia articles (I removed one for you and then stopped) and replace them with other reliable sources (see WP:RS). Cielquiparle (talk) 04:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No Wikipedia citations are used to support any of the points, they're only used to link to the individuals or orgs, I will remove them and simply use the appropriate tags [[ ]] Milicz (talk) 15:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK @Milicz...starting to look a bit better. Do you think you could work out a way to explain that Illinois ODP also fields competitive girl's soccer teams in inter-state competitions in the lead paragraph? I think that is not really coming through unless you read further down. (If you only say "program" it sounds like a purely administrative thing which makes people want to delete it.) Cielquiparle (talk) 05:33, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:The Tags on the article are too alarming, check creators contributions, there are high similarities on articles created, now for example the article title is "Illinois ODP" but the first text is "Illinois Girls Olympic Development Program", It seams to have a slight deviation from the article title to be honest. I was to suggest that instead of the creator creating similar pages with different Page names, It would have been wise to just create one or two and provide good source, good writing, formatting skills and make the writing clearer to anyone who comes across the article to understand.

Allblessed (talk) 14:16, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it's not uncommon at all for the article title to be short (see WP:CONCISE) versus the first bolded reference to the subject to be long (as examples, see Barack Obama or George H. W. Bush). Please also have a read of WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP. You are right to want good sources and good writing, but AfD should not be your first port of call in addressing cleanup issues. Cielquiparle (talk) 18:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inland Empire Ravens

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

Another long-term unsourced article found during WP:JUN25. I can find basically nothing useful under the team's second name of "Inland Empire Ravens"; the older name of "West Coast Lightning" has more hits but those are basically all either final scores in lists of sports events with no substantial coverage or announcements that a game will be played that don't come with substantial coverage either. I don't see a WP:GNG pass here. Hog Farm _Talk 01:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and California. Hog Farm _Talk 01:00, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: That the plans to announce its home venue in the coming weeks statement in the lead has always been in the article since its 2011 creation (and been tagged as {{when}} since 2019) is probably a good indicator that no one has shown sufficient interest in this topic to even justify updating that beyond the team's name change — probably because that would require significant coverage that clearly does not and will not exist here. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:13, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - it seems the article has zero interest in growth, even if someone to expand it, it wouldnt be worthy of it's own article, thus failing GNG. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 21:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Society of Television Lighting and Design

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

1 of the sources is its own website, this one appears to be advertorial. Unable to find SIGCOV to meet WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Organizations, and United Kingdom. LibStar (talk) 01:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Calliope: Pittsburgh Folk Music Society

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

No significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 00:46, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Organizations, and Pennsylvania. SL93 (talk) 00:47, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. doesn't have enough sources to establish notability. The sources are their own website, which is considered primary.Darkm777 (talk) 00:31, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Optical Society of Japan

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

No refs on the page for many years. I don't read Japanese but I'm not seeing sufficient RS to meet the inclusion standards. I'd be interested to see if others can find anything to discuss. JMWt (talk) 07:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Japan. JMWt (talk) 07:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Japan Society of Applied Physics Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. From a quick check in 2004 it had ~2000 members which for me is big enough. I added a couple of sources, from Google there is a bit more but I think this is enough for a WP:HEY pass as a stub. Ldm1954 (talk) 11:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: to the main society seems fine. I ran it through here [10], hoping a history of the org would show up, no such luck Oaktree b (talk) 15:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am confused. I had no problem finding sources for the history using simple Google -- I added some. To me any scientific organisation with 2000 members, one general journal, one membership journal, connections to other comparable societies in other countries should be a Speedy Keep (particularly in light of WP:BEFORE). Ldm1954 (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Micro Tech Global Foundation

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH. Indian media sources should be viewed carefully, as they often present press releases as news WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India. TC-BT-1C-SI (talk) 12:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Organizations, Education, Sports, and Technology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - when I last edited this article > 10 years ago, WP:RSP did not exist, much less WP:RSNOI that clearly affects notability here (based on the sources in this article). Actually, when WP:RSP came to exist in 2018, MTGF may have ceased to exist already. Their last Facebook post was in March 2018. Their website went down in 2017. Their initiative, Micro Premier League, had its last Facebook post in 2018. Their parent company Micro Technologies (India) Ltd has no article here, and possibly ceased to exist in 2014, with their website going down in 2015. starship.paint (talk / cont) 06:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Due to WP:RSNOI, it is imperative to review non-news sources. Google Books produces four results, which all seem to be false positives (preceding MTGF's founding in 2010, or just no mention in the book). Google Scholar produces one result under "Micro Tech Global Foundation", which merely cites MTGF as a reference for " Land Use Pattern of Navi Mumbai", nothing is described further about MTGF. Google Scholar produces one result for "MicroTech Global Foundation", but this is an article written by MTGF's chairman. Google News produces one report where MTGF's chairman contributed to, and one press-release like report. starship.paint (talk / cont) 06:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - in light of the nominator's rationale, including WP:RSNOI, WP:ROUTINE and the lack of coverage in books or scholarly sources as I have written above, plus the already defunct < 10 years existence of this organization means no further notability. Page viewcount since 2015 lists an average of 1 view per day, so not prominent at all. starship.paint (talk / cont) 06:34, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Greens

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

Not notable, currently no sources in the article and google only brought up stuff from 2011 related to Nándor Tánczos TheLoyalOrder (talk) 03:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and New Zealand. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 03:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Essentially WP:PROMO. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 04:57, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not appear to be any sigcov of this. There are trivial mentions of the group/spokesmen for the group but that is not sufficient coverage to establish an article with. Traumnovelle (talk) 01:21, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 12:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand. Not notable outside of the parent organization. Appears to lack the sourcing to be independently notable. Better suited as a section in the article about the Greens. Bkissin (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Association for Liberal Thinking

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

Last AfD was 2006. The only sources provided are its own website (same with the Turkish version of the article). Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 01:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Turkey. LibStar (talk) 01:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the article editor Qwertyx~enwiki changed their ID years ago. I am not aware if they are an active user. The only two references are from the home page of Association for Liberal Thinking. — Maile (talk) 02:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If they have "~enwiki" in their name, I think that means their account was WP:USURPNAME which started in 2008. – The Grid (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Turkish think tanks; the subject fails WP:ORG for its own article but a search yields enough references that it could be included elsewhere. Surayeproject3 (talk) 01:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Power and Participation Research Centre

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

Non-notable research organization. Although cited occasionally, there are no independent, reliable sources containing significant coverage about it. Fails WP:NORG. Worldbruce (talk) 00:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Bangladesh. Worldbruce (talk) 00:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Centre for Policy Dialogue - There exists a growing number of secondary sources for the article due to its participation at a conference hosted by a separate Bangladeshi organization, see linked [11]. If the article for CPD is reworked, I think more information about the PPRC could be included there. Surayeproject3 (talk) 01:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of utility cooperatives

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

Stated by @Otr500:, most entries didn’t have articles, with many that do having questionable notability. He cited WP:NOTDIRECTORY.

As for me, this article’s sourcing is barren, with sources that are serving no purpose beyond directing to their respective company’s website. With this article having inadequate sourcing, I believe it should be merged into Category:Utility cooperatives. Roast (talk) 18:37, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment: At present, almost every entry has an article, and most of them are decent enough in the sample I checked. Not sure whether this list is the way to go, though. Mangoe (talk) 19:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, and Lists. Skynxnex (talk) 20:02, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: I am inclined to agree with Guerreroast, as a secondary option on a merge, as an WP:ATD. The embedded US list has no references. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, there are nearly 3,000 electric distribution companies in the US that include "investor-owned, publicly owned, and cooperatives". According to the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, there are over 900 Cooperatives. Listing 75 does nothing as a table of contents or navigation aid. Two sources cover Japan, and two cover California water companies.

An issue is a lack of reliable and independent sources overall, on the article, and none in the US section, indicating a lack of notability|. WP:NLIST states Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables. Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group.

On a "spot-check:

A&N Electric Cooperative: The first on the list has six references. Three of the sources are dead (404 Page Not Found) links, which include the two non-primary sources. While this possibly can be corrected, it is a red flag.
Allegheny Electric Cooperative: Two primary sources only.
Carroll Electric Cooperative: Four sources, one non-primary.
Central Texas Electric Cooperative: One "official" (primary) source improperly listed as an "External link".
Concho Valley Electric Cooperative: One "official" (primary) source improperly listed as an "External link".
Fayette Electric Cooperative: One "official" (primary) source improperly listed as an "External link".
Kauaʻi Island Utility Cooperative: YEA! 11 sources.
Minnkota Power Cooperative: No sources, two links in the "External links" section,
North Arkansas Electric Cooperative: One "official" (primary) source improperly listed as an "External link".
Oliver-Mercer Electric Cooperative: No source. Google Books link in the "External links" section.
Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative: Four sources.
West Florida Electric Cooperative: Four sources.

It appears that a lot of the individual articles are not notable, but certainly not part of a list. -- Otr500 (talk) 15:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FC St. Louis

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

Redirect to Women's Premier Soccer League as I am unable to find much of any coverage of this team after searches on Google and Newspapers.com, let alone enough to warrant a standalone article. JTtheOG (talk) 06:13, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Football, and Missouri. JTtheOG (talk) 06:13, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Just found a huge article about them on ProQuest, searching for "FC St. Louis" and then "soccer". (Log in to ProQuest via Wikipedia Library first and link should work.) Don't have time right now but looks like there is more. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. Giant Snowman 18:23, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:54, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:32, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as above. 🟥⭐ ^{talk to me!} 03:37, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Western Canada Wilderness Committee

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

I believe the topic fails to meet GNG. While I'm not the greatest at looking for sources, the only coverage I found was mentions of the organization in relation to protecting an owl species, but nothing that covered it at length. Also, while I realize that the present quality of the article doesn't determine its suitability, the condition right now is a big problem. The entirety of the current content was written by an employee of the organization named Stephanie Gribble, and is entirely sourced to the org's own website (yes, there's one other citation, but it only verifies when a law was passed and says nothing about the article subject). -- Fyrael (talk) 03:28, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Organizations, Education, Environment, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:39, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - but it's in need of a total rewrite, which I'm happy to help with once this AfD is over, because it is currently written as though it were the organization's website and has a large WP:COI problem. There are a very large number of sources in Proquest going back over 30 years; this group has done a lot. You can get proquest access through The Wikipedia Library; highly recommended. FalconK (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a great recommendation. I had never heard of The Wikipedia Library before this, and I was recently trying quite hard to get access to JSTOR. -- Fyrael (talk) 03:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Queeramnesty

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

No sources independent of the subject. Not notable Tito Omburo (talk) 00:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 June 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:16, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Sexuality and gender, and Switzerland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:36, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In the spirit of WP:NMEDIA, this group is widely cited in Swiss media on the issue of queer asylum seekers [12][13][14]. My newspaper database has 169 results for "Queeramnesty"; on account of the unique name none should be false positives. I haven't looked through all of them yet, but most are quotes from the organization alongside a short description of what they do. Will try to prepare WP:THREE. Toadspike [Talk] 14:58, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I can't find any sigcov about this organization despite the many times it has been quoted or cited in reliable sources. If we had an article on Amnesty International Switzerland, I would suggest a merge there, but we do not. So I'm sticking with a "keep" for now but recognize that reasonable people may disagree with my argument. Toadspike [Talk] 15:21, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The parent organization (Amnesty International Switzerland) should be notable, a quick web search turned up [15][16][17]. If someone can spin up a short stub, I'd support a merge. Toadspike [Talk] 15:30, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The connection between them may be the human conscious, but the independence from each other is distinct in nature. Inclusive or emphasis on the differences, both have their pros and cons. Quinhonk (talk) 05:02, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Quinhonk I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. However, if you'd like to turn this redirect into an article in the next few days, then we can merge this content there. Toadspike [Talk] 15:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I totally agree! How Amnesty International got associated with the LGBTQIA+ movements was also what I had been pondering about when I got to know QueerAmnesty. It's like the history of the queer movement is entangled with the Second Wave Feminism, and the latter to the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Quinhonk (talk) 18:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This source is quite good: https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/act790012004en.pdf

It started at the beginning of anti-dehumanizing LGBTQIA+ people. It is also associated with the issue of infrahumanization. Quinhonk (talk) 18:18, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. As discussed above, the movement is a significant revelation and step taken by Amnesty International, and it ought to be put into the historic context, unless and until the main article is too long to be kept both informative and brief, then we can add the distinct section that is not about national section or not.

--Quinhonk (talk) 16:57, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: if merge, where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. As the nominator, it seems that there is consensus to redirect to some other article. There is not consensus as to which article (one that exists, and one that does not). Please assess accordingly. Tito Omburo (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St. Patrick Church (Wyandotte)

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

Apparently non-notable parish church in metro Detroit. The only source provided is an official parish history, which is obviously non-independent. A WP:BEFORE search turns up nothing usable except a local news piece on its 155th anniversary, which is not enough on its own for a WP:GNG pass as a standalone page. Open to a redirect to List_of_churches_in_the_Roman_Catholic_Archdiocese_of_Detroit#South_Region, where it is mentioned, but bringing it to AfD since it has already been draftified and returned to mainspace without improvements, so I didn't think a WP:BLAR was appropriate in that situation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Organizations, Christianity, and Michigan. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found more in a WP:BEFORE search including sources from 1890: [18]. The book Catholic Churches of Detroit (Godzak, 2004) may not quite be SIGCOV, but there's good mention in Irish in Michigan (Metress & Metress, 2006). I stopped searching there. This absolutely needs better sources, I'm not yet convinced it's a keep but if it's not it's not too far off. SportingFlyer T·C 08:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the list article recommended by Dclemens1971. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assyrian Progressive Nationalist Party

AfDs for this article:

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

Restarting a deletion discussion for this article, will aim to detail in a reply Surayeproject3 (talk) 02:25, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Organizations, Politics, and Iraq. Surayeproject3 (talk) 02:25, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I originally nominated this article for deletion back in March of this year. Following a larger search for sources, I only found five worth noting:

Constitution of the party
Iraq Country Assessment by the UK, on page 66
Leftist Parties of Iraq (now dead website), mentions year of establishment, founder, and ideology
Europa World Year, mentions opposition to Kurdish region
Journal article by Vahram Petrosian, on page 25

Even within these sources, the subject is only given small mentions that are one or a few sentences in length. A commenter on the previous AfD mentioned that there would've been print media discussions of the party, though I couldn't find any such sources archived (even by searching the name of the party in Arabic, no results come up). Having not found more than these five sources with more or similar discussion, it's safe to assume that the articles fails Wikipedia:SIGCOV beyond trivial mentions and, although noting that reliable sources exist mentioning the party, that WP:ORGSIG applies as other similar parties exist that advocate for the same things. I argue for deletion based on these merits. Surayeproject3 (talk) 02:46, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This was the party of Saddam Hussein, who was executed in 2006. Nothing found that indicates this party still exists. — Maile (talk) 03:22, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Notability is not temporary. Just because it is no longer exists does not itself mean it isn't notable. Curbon7 (talk) 03:42, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"This was the party of Saddam Hussein"? What? Geschichte (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this already passed a AfD very recently. Nothing has changed since, and my argument remains: "whilst contemporary internet coverage is very scarse, it is worth noting that it would have received media attention in print media in Iraq at the time (esp. as being propped up by the govt at the time). The stance on national question is also interesting, as contrast to other groups. Here is an English version of its program [19]." --Soman (talk) 11:20, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Allblessed (talk) 17:50, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 redirect‎ to Syrian Turkmen Brigades. per redirect arguments (non-admin closure) Cinder painter (talk) 06:48, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror Brigade

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

On 14MAY2025, I PRODed this article with the following rationale: "Plainly fails WP:SIGCOV, as the MEMRI coverage only refers to it as one among many Syrian Turkmen Brigades, The New York Times only devotes a single sentence to remarking on the trend of naming after Ottoman rulers, and Bulbajer's guide on Google Docs is not a reliable source. The Institute for the Study of War is a generally reputable source, but its brief coverage is only cited to X/Twitter posts. Searches for additional sources did not yield significant coverage to merit an article separate from Syrian Turkmen Brigades and Sultan Murad Division." A. B. chose to redirect to Sultan Murad Division as a reasonable alternative to deletion and Durranistan changed the redirect to Syrian Turkmen Brigades, as this brigade is part of that grouping but left the Sultan Murad Division nine years ago. Today, article creator Farcazo reverted the change to a redirect, simply remarking "It's the thought of one user, not all of Wikipedia." in the edit summary. I support the latter redirect target, so per WP:ATD-R, I am proposing that here. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 02:41, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Syria. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 02:41, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:28, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per User:ViridianPenguin above. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 03:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per User:ViridianPenguin. Also, as Bulbajer, I can confirm that as much as I'm proud of it, my Google Doc guide is not a reliable source, at least as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Bulbajer (talk) 19:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep You can't say that MEMRI and the Institute for the Study of War are not reliable sources, then that would destroy a large part of Gaza War and its related articles. I understand that The New York Times only dedicates one sentence and that Bulbajer's guide on Google Docs is not reliable, but there are more articles that talk more in depth about the militia, such as: Syrian Memory. Misbar, which is about the leader and the militia integrated into the transitional government and although if you notice the photo says "Sultan Mehmed" what happens is a bad translation of the militia

and to clarify, I didn't want my effort to go to waste because of someone and that they literally didn't read a single paragraph of the article and that they literally accuses me of bad faith is something reprehensible, and knowing, I can accept that it becomes a paragraph in Syrian Turkmen Brigades but that they literally waste it is wrong

Farcazo (talk) 23:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did not claim that MEMRI and the Institute of the Study of War are unreliable, only that their coverage of this brigade is insignificant and that in the latter case, the source regurgitates social media posts that would themselves be unreliable. Accusing me of not reading the article before PRODing is itself bad faith. I only meant to express that your reversion made no rebuttal of the PROD rationale for me to respond to in bringing the article to AfD.

As for the newly presented sources: 1) The Syrian Memory Institution link is a repository of villages and other brigades’ communication with this brigade, not a reliable source presenting significant coverage 2) The Misbar link returns a 404 error and has no Internet Archive backup 3) RDI’s one-paragraph listing of three women kidnapped by this brigade is not SIGCOV 4) The Suriye Gündemi article’s only mention of the brigade is listing it among many opposition groups involved in Operation Olive Branch, reinforcing the choice to redirect to a broader term 5) Per WP:MEDIUM, this self-published source is unreliable 6) Alexander McKeever’s Substack profile of the brigade is another self-published source. McKeever’s only publication is his master’s thesis, failing to qualify him as a subject-matter expert per WP:SPS 7) The French version of this article relies on many Twitter/X posts and sources that I am disputing the reliability of here. ViridianPenguin🐧 (💬) 04:41, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per User:ViridianPenguin's rationale. Surayeproject3 (talk) 01:24, 23 June 2025 (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.

Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy

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

Declined prod. Provided sources are not independent like philosophy publications or the university connected with it. Nothing in google books, 1 hit in google scholar, limited google news hits. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 00:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Organizations, United States of America, and Illinois. LibStar (talk) 00:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - doesn't seem to be WP:SIGCOV, all of the mentions in news articles seem to be trivial/passing mentions Psychastes (talk) 15:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I actually get a number of hits in Google Books for this organization describing its role in the Continental reception and Continental/Analytic debates in the US. Jahaza (talk) 15:33, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've put in an interlibrary loan request for The Reception of Husserlian Phenomenology in North America (2019), ed. Michela Beatrice Ferri ISBN 9783319991832, which has a chapter "The Society of Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy" (pp. 267-282) by Anthony Steinbock. Jahaza (talk) 16:02, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also found a journal article doi:10.5325/jspecphil.26.2.0102. Jahaza (talk) 16:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning Keep: Appears to be plenty of sources showing up on Google Scholar - some examples where the coverage is definitely in depth: doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99185-6_16, doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226821580-011, The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy. There are also some papers in this issue of the Journal of Speculative Philosophy but I'm not sure if that is actually independent coverage. Shapeyness (talk) 12:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:30, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: This seems like a strong source [20], its got 5-6 pages about it. The NY Times article is not in depth but it is definitely reliable and secondary. this blog post has lots of subject matter experts commenting on SPEP which might give further searching hints. This isn't a very rigorous source either but [21] shows USC viewing SPEP on a similar level to the APA. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy has numerous articles about SPEP but I can't tell if that is what you thought was non-independent of the organization. Moritoriko (talk) 07:30, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orange Planet

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

Suspect WP:UCOI, related to Smilegate. Smilegate has had a series of single-purpose accounts engage in likely COI on the English Wikipedia in recent months [22]. This user is just one in a pattern of COI editing. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 05:49, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Companies, and South Korea. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 05:49, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - I can verify it exists but cannot find significant coverage for a standalone page. May I suggest WP:COIN for the editing behavior as that does not determine notability? --CNMall41 (talk) 16:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Ganesha811 (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect when we only suspect the COI, it might be best to go with the redirect instead of fully deleting the content. As is the case here. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Checking, because it wasn't identified, is Smilegate the proposed Redirect target article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 23:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Smilegate: seems like an ok choice, it's basically a sub-unit of the company Oaktree b (talk) 00:04, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of hospitals in the United Arab Emirates

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

Does not meet WP:NLIST, is contrary to WP:NOTDIRECTORY. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 04:36, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Organizations, Medicine, and United Arab Emirates. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 04:36, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:58, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment There are lists for most nations; I'm not seeing how this one is necessarily different from the rest. Mangoe (talk) 21:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd point to WP:OTHER if anyone has similar thoughts. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 22:33, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine if you wish to propose this as a test case for deleting the lot (which I wouldn't oppose), but otherwise I think an explanation how this one is going to be worse than the others is in order. Mangoe (talk) 01:01, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 05:33, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Deleting this article would have to set a precedent for other "List of hospitals in (country)" articles, the bulk of which likely have very wide differences in their sourcing and structure. Compare Kenya and Japan in this instance. I don't think deleting the article is the best solution, so if I was voting, I would say keep the article. But I think there would need to be a larger discussion surrounding these lists to determine whether a bulk deletion is needed if the request passes. Surayeproject3 (talk) 01:29, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A lot of these should probably be deleted. There are worse sourced ones like List of hospitals in Ivory Coast. Most of these could be handled by categories. Metallurgist (talk) 05:19, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to Healthcare in the United Arab Emirates. killer bee  15:52, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The idea of a merge seems, strange, how would that work? And do note that all hospitals that are on that list which have an article will still exist in Category:Hospitals in the United Arab Emirates. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 00:52, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merging should work because some of these hospitals are notable and have their own articles. Mentioning them on Healthcare in the United Arab Emirates would be fine. killer bee  17:08, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 15:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand Asian Studies Society

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

Declined prod. Unreferenced for 15 years and fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom FMSky (talk) 11:31, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:18, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Learned societies, like individual academics, are important and their articles should be kept. Our existing policies have forced the deletion of way too many articles about learned societies and other nonprofits. It's probably time to develop a more inclusive policy for learned societies. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:01, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please state how it meets notability. LibStar (talk) 10:05, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If there is interest in changing policy, an individual AfD is not the place to do so.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 05:44, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I do not see any SIGCOV. If Eastmain wants to create a new SNG this isn't the place to propose it. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Czech Republic in First Place!

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

Fails relevant guidelines including WP:ORG. Most of the article isn't even about the political party. The sources which do relate to the party, do not provide in-depth and independent coverage of it. C 679 15:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Czech Republic. C 679 15:47, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

- There are plenty of sources, but maybe it's true that the party itself isn't the notable topic here. Possible move to Ladislav Vrabel? (Currently a redirect to this article). Jdcooper (talk) 21:22, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with @Jdcooper that the sources are sufficient, and they could be expanded as well. The party is currently active and plans to run in the October election as well.

At max, it would be feasible to merge this article with Czech Republic First!, but I don't think that's needed. Kroulacek (talk) 20:20, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lean keep - The content here, although off-topic and centred around the founder only, is still salvageable. The party is at least notable enough to have SOME sources written about it: the article can be promoted to at least a safe Start-class with sufficient work. The Troutinator - Slap me | 09:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:28, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The article is fairly notable, but it talks about the founder of the party and his political activities since founding the party in question. A rework of this article would probably be better for its subject, there's one on the Czech Wikipedia for Vrabel which can be used as a basis. [23] Surayeproject3 (talk) 01:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Roofing Contractors Association

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

Declined prod that was redirected to Reid Ribble. Ribble was only president for 2 years and his article contains no information on what this association is/did. Article created by a single purpose account.

A search in google news only comes up with roofing related sources which are not independent for meeting WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 04:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, and United States of America. LibStar (talk) 04:13, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I added several references. LeapTorchGear (talk) 23:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A number of added sources are from primary sources such as "Roofing Contractor". LibStar (talk) 23:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo Family Foundation

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

In most sources, the Bravo Family Foundation is a passing mention rather than the focus of the article (typically Orlando Bravo). This does not meet WP:SIGCOV. 30Four (talk) 06:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Puerto Rico, and United States of America. 30Four (talk) 06:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While I would not be strongly opposed to merging the content into Orlando Bravo, it's important to note that much of the more significant coverage that the organization has received can be found in Spanish-language and Puerto Rico-focused news sites, which may have been overlooked. See the dozens of articles in El Nuevo Día here: https://www.elnuevodia.com/buscador/bravo%20family%20foundation/*/*/*/*/*/ - many of these are passing mentions, but several would certainly be considered WP:SIGCOV. There is a similar wealth of coverage in News Is My Business (see here) and Primera Hora (such as this one). It's natural for articles covering the organization to focus on the founder, since the organization bears his name and the two are inextricably linked. But that shouldn't take away from the organization's distinct notability when the coverage is there. (Note: I have a conflict of interest with the organization, as I work for Thoma Bravo.) JBarTB (talk) 13:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A majority of the coverage appears to attribute the actions of the foundation as actions of its founder, and while true that this is natural, paints an odd picture for Wikipedia. It's easy to characterize the foundation as an arm of Orlando Brown based on the sources presented on the page, rather than the foundation standing on its own merit (for Wikipedia notability purposes only - the charitable causes are obviously great in their own right). I think merging would be a better option in this case personally. A merge would allow for the good parts of this article to continue to exist on Orlando Brown's page. I'd recommend against stating that WP:SOURCESEXIST in El Nuevo Día / News Is My Business & instead list the sources found in those publications where the foundation is directly the focus, when attempting to meet the WP:SIGCOV threshold. 30Four (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:53, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 10:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Orlando Bravo. I tried to review every non-paywalled source cited in the Wikipedia article, though some were inaccessible. A very brief google search didn't find anything except for press releases. If I have some more time in the next few days, I'll do a more complete search.

I was able to access the San Francisco Business Times article through an internet archive, but it does not contain the word "Bravo". Maybe the intended link was to the article Operation Bravo, which does discuss Orlando Bravo but is paywalled. Providence Journal really only has one paragraph about the foundation itself, which is insignificant coverage. CBS and ncdc.noaa.gov have no mention of the foundation. Forbes was written by a staff member, so it should be reliable and independent, but it doesn't have significant coverage of the foundation. Same with SFGate and People: no coverage of the foundation. There are two Caribbean News articles, neither of which I can access (web.archive.org isn't loading for some reason). For the purposes of notability, one publisher counts as one source, so this is potentially one source supporting notability. Sin comillas 1 and 2 seem like press releases. They're purportedly by the editorial staff, but I'm struggling to figure out who the editorial staff is. The website doesn't have an article on the English or Spanish Wikipedias, and it doesn't have many on-wiki citations: [24]. It looks like it's being published using WordPress. Both articles end in the same exact paragraph, which suggests they are press releases. News Is My Business isn't significant even if it checks all the other boxes. PR Headline News parrots the same line (Guided by the belief that...) as Sin comillas except in English rather than Spanish, so I suspect all three articles get that paragraph from the foundation (the source fails the independence criterion). Overall, there's not enough sourcing to suggest notability. Maybe San Francisco Business Times and Caribbean News. That's maybe-two sources, which is not quite the three that are usually needed to establish notability.

@JBarTB: It's been a few weeks since you last edited, but it would really help if you could name the three best sources you can find. For example, a particular news article published in El Nuevo Día about the history of the Bravo Family Foundation (not a link to all articles in El Nuevo Día that mention the foundation). We're looking for reliable, secondary sources that are independent of each other, are independent of the Bravo family, and contain significant coverage (ideally 100+ words but maybe as low as 50 words) about the foundation. It doesn't matter if the sources are in English or in Spanish. PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 07:20, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I missed a few sources. Anything sourced to www.bravofamilyfoundation.org would be non-independent. I missed one News is My Busines article[25] that states that it is based on a press release. I missed a two-minute CNN video that is giving me an error message. It is about the businessman rather than the foundation. PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 07:30, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PrinceTortoise: Thanks for pinging me! I hope you get a chance to see this before this AfD is closed. First, the San Francisco Business Times article (Operation Bravo) is very strong - it is almost entirely focused on the foundation. I also struggled with the paywall initially, but managed to get the text from the article's source code - happy to email you the full text if you like. Other SIGCOV sources include:

a lengthy overview of the foundation in the philanthropy news site Inside Philanthropy
2022 article about the foundation from EFE
2021 article in El Nuevo Día on the foundation's support of those displaced in the Surfside condominium collapse, which also covers the foundation's earlier history.

As I said above, I'm not strongly opposed to a merge result here. But it would be a shame, as I believe significant coverage can be demonstrated. JBarTB (talk) 15:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I eventually managed to work around the paywalls. Thank you JBarTB for finding quality sources. Here's my source assessment:

Source assessment table prepared by User:PrinceTortoise
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2019/11/01/puerto-ricos-first-billionaire-turns-his-focus-and.html		No obvious issues, affiliated with American City Business Journals	Dedicates significant parts of the article to the foundation's programs	✔ Yes
https://es-us.noticias.yahoo.com/magnate-orlando-bravo-ayuda-miles-173842577.html	Seems like original reporting by EFE. The generic byline looks typical for EFE.	Agencia EFE ought to be a reliable source given how prominent it is	It's close, but I think this is a "yes"	✔ Yes
https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/find-a-grant/grants-b/bravo-family-foundation	Claims independence	Seems legit, founded by David Callahan		✔ Yes
https://web.archive.org/web/20210628141735/https://www.elnuevodia.com/negocios/empresas-comercios/notas/fundacion-de-la-familia-de-orlando-bravo-dona-250000-para-brindar-apoyo-a-los-afectados-por-el-colapso-de-edificio-en-miami/	Seems like original reporting	Newspaper of record	~ In my opinion, it's not quite significant coverage about the foundation.	~ Partial
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

With at least three good sources, this foundation is looking like it is notable. While this article will naturally have some overlap with Orlando Bravo's article, I think there is enough information in the above sources to justify a separate article. I've struck my redirect suggestion and now vote that we keep this article. PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 02:06, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organizations

Organizations deletion

Proposed deletions

Categories