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.
This is a second AfD due to the first finding no consensus. Article on this organization is sourced almost entirely to its own website. The only substantial RS about it relates to a single contest it organized and, therefore, does not meet GNG for sustained and ongoing coverage. Edit - two additional RS discovered in the original AfD were fleeting and incidental mentions of the organization that do not establish anything about it other than it exists and, therefore, fail
WP:ORGDEPTH.
Chetsford (
talk) 00:20, 29 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep - We dont put articles up for deletion again just days after the last AfD was closed. This would have been a matter for the talk page of the article. My stance has not changed in the last few days. Still keep.--
BabbaQ (
talk) 08:49, 29 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Your reason for keep was "sources shows that the foundation exists"[1]. The mere existence of a thing does not meet the threshold of
WP:GNG. Many things exist, not all receive WP entries. For instance, my cat exists, however, she does not merit a WP entry even if I were able to prove her existence.
AfD is not a vote or ballot; per
WP:AFDEQ "justification and evidence for a response carries far more weight than the response itself". Therefore, "it exists" should not be given the same consideration as a policy-based argument for delete.
Chetsford (
talk) 15:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
The BushrangerOne ping only 02:07, 5 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete fails GNG; proof of life is not proof of notability
Burley22 (
talk) 00:47, 6 November 2017 (UTC)reply
That summary makes no sense.
BabbaQ (
talk) 07:19, 6 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Procedural Keep I don't see an obvious reason to delete, and it was *just* nominated. Also, I'm voting to merge a different nomination here.
power~enwiki (
π,
ν) 04:05, 11 November 2017 (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.