78:) that occurred very recently (apparently the article was created within 3 days of the newspaper reporting). Concerning the arguments presented in the discussion: The nom does not (as argued lower) state that the article should be deleted because of SPA, SOAPBOX, or ONEEVENT concerns. It is perfectly normal to give a short description of an article's history before presenting the deletion argument, which indeed follows immediately. In what follows, whereas the "delete" arguments are solidly policy-based (especially
419:
minimum annual donations/revenue, etc. The only thing
Knowledge cares about is whether the organization has received significant, in depth coverage in multiple reliable sources for more than one event. Could be one person or a million -- the sources are there or they're not. What that quote doesn't mean is that a smaller organization should be held to a lower standard because it's smaller. --—
397:"smaller organizations and their products can be notable, just as individuals can be notable. Arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations or their products." As NOAV is a smaller grassroots animal rights group mention in national newspapers it does make NOAV notable in the context of the type of group it is.
70:: In response to queries on my talk page, I am adding the following rationale: After checking all of the references that were present in the article, it would appear that one (astrazeneca.com) does not mention NOAV and one other is from NOAV itself. Neither can contribute to establish notability. All other references are
620:-- Well, of course that's not what that statement means or it would be meaningless. These policy pages peppered throughout this discussion stem from core Knowledge/encyclopedia principles, so it's not like a court of law where the letter of the law can win a case (not that you were necessarily trying to do so). --—
494:" The author of the article is irrelevant to AfD. The article has the appropriate encyclopedic tone. It is not a soapbox. Even if it was, that would be an indication for clean-up, not deletion. WP:ONEEVENT is explicitly about biographies. The article is about an organization, not an individual person.
418:
You're applying that quote in nearly the opposite way it's intended. What it means is that big organizations and small organizations should be treated equally, in a way that doesn't measure their importance by their size. For example, we wouldn't have a standard for a minimum number of members,
679:
A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. A single independent source is almost never sufficient for
682:
The article appears to meet this standard. In contrast, the three sentences in the nomination fail to make a convincing case for the articles deletion: WP:SPA is an essay that does not recommend automatic deletion of articles written by newcomers (it actually references the guideline
82:), the "keep" arguments resort to wikilawyering ("NOAV is a smaller grassroots animal rights group", "a period of time is any period of time", etc). Together, I found the "keep" arguments unconvincing and agree that creating an article for this organization is too soon. --
512:
states "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." How many secondary sources have you counted? How many sources would you like to see for this article?
197:
603:. 86.6.31.117, if you are affiliated with the organization then you should disclose that conflict of interest, please. And if you have commented here under a signed-in account, please disclose that as well. thanks
441:
554:"over a period of time" being the key idea here. ONEEVENT and NOTNEWS are different applications of the same basic idea -- that notability extends beyond an event or events in a short timeframe. Hence
572:"sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time" NOAV meets this "sufficiently significant attention" ie national newspapers, has been in mentioned in High Court:
552:
Knowledge articles cover notable topics—those that have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of
Knowledge.
191:
123:
118:
127:
303:
323:
110:
150:
573:
259:
157:
687:
instead), age of the organization is not mentioned as a criterion at WP:ORG, and a minimum source count of five is not supported by our notability guidelines.
212:
179:
404:
696:
665:
629:
612:
591:
567:
526:
469:
428:
412:
386:
363:
335:
315:
294:
273:
251:
91:
61:
574:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/antivivisection-group-offers-cash-to-name-cambridge-animal-testing-lab-workers-9821900.html
173:
583:
169:
17:
114:
354:. Organization just established, attracted a little attention for one event, but not seeing enough about anything else. --—
449:
219:
240:. Organization literally just started in October 2014. Secondary source coverage is less than I can count on one hand. —
106:
98:
715:
185:
40:
408:
453:
711:
653:
587:
36:
579:
400:
87:
57:
622:
560:
421:
356:
205:
539:
489:
382:
289:
237:
649:
555:
543:
485:
374:
351:
347:
331:
311:
233:
79:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
710:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
692:
661:
608:
394:
371:
83:
53:
684:
269:
247:
674:
558:, because this organization will likely be notable in the future, but isn't now. --—
547:
524:
509:
481:
467:
378:
285:
229:
327:
307:
144:
688:
657:
604:
600:
264:
242:
533:
514:
457:
652:. may never be notable for a period of time, or may be. we have no
576:
and "over a period of time" a period of time is any period of time
445:
618:
and "over a period of time" a period of time is any period of time
704:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
506:
Secondary source coverage is less than I can count on one hand.
140:
136:
132:
204:
499:
Organization literally just started in
October 2014.
304:
list of United
Kingdom-related deletion discussions
324:list of Organizations-related deletion discussions
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
718:). No further edits should be made to this page.
680:demonstrating the notability of an organization.
440:. Several appropriate sources are provided. The
550:, the latter of which begins with the nutshell
260:list of Medicine-related deletion discussions
218:
8:
322:Note: This debate has been included in the
302:Note: This debate has been included in the
258:Note: This debate has been included in the
321:
301:
257:
456:are sufficient to establish notability.
617:
551:
7:
107:National Operation Anti-Vivisection
99:National Operation Anti-Vivisection
24:
542:mistakenly when they mean either
72:brief reports of one single event
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
284:. Notability not established.
1:
697:03:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
673:: The relevant guideline at
666:21:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
630:21:47, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
613:21:29, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
592:21:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
568:20:49, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
527:12:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
470:12:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
429:05:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
413:04:16, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
387:00:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
364:22:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
336:22:23, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
316:22:23, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
295:21:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
274:19:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
252:19:18, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
92:13:52, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
62:10:02, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
735:
601:contributor from Cambridge
68:Comment added after close
707:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
76:significant coverage
480:Article created by
228:Article created by
582:comment added by
538:People often use
403:comment added by
338:
318:
292:
276:
726:
709:
656:. But not now.
627:
625:
594:
565:
563:
537:
523:
519:
466:
462:
426:
424:
415:
361:
359:
290:
223:
222:
208:
160:
148:
130:
34:
734:
733:
729:
728:
727:
725:
724:
723:
722:
716:deletion review
705:
623:
621:
577:
561:
559:
531:
521:
515:
484:apparently for
464:
458:
422:
420:
398:
357:
355:
232:apparently for
165:
156:
121:
105:
102:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
732:
730:
721:
720:
700:
699:
668:
654:WP:CRYSTALBALL
643:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
632:
624:Rhododendrites
570:
562:Rhododendrites
502:
495:
473:
472:
434:
433:
432:
431:
423:Rhododendrites
405:109.144.143.93
389:
366:
358:Rhododendrites
340:
339:
319:
298:
297:
278:
277:
226:
225:
162:
101:
96:
95:
94:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
731:
719:
717:
713:
708:
702:
701:
698:
694:
690:
686:
681:
676:
672:
669:
667:
663:
659:
655:
651:
648:
645:
644:
631:
626:
619:
616:
615:
614:
610:
606:
602:
598:
597:
596:
595:
593:
589:
585:
581:
575:
571:
569:
564:
557:
553:
549:
545:
541:
535:
530:
529:
528:
525:
520:
518:
511:
507:
503:
500:
496:
493:
491:
487:
483:
477:
476:
475:
474:
471:
468:
463:
461:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
436:
435:
430:
425:
417:
416:
414:
410:
406:
402:
396:
393:
390:
388:
384:
380:
376:
373:
370:
367:
365:
360:
353:
349:
345:
342:
341:
337:
333:
329:
325:
320:
317:
313:
309:
305:
300:
299:
296:
293:
287:
283:
280:
279:
275:
271:
267:
266:
261:
256:
255:
254:
253:
249:
245:
244:
239:
235:
231:
221:
217:
214:
211:
207:
203:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
181:
178:
175:
171:
168:
167:Find sources:
163:
159:
155:
152:
146:
142:
138:
134:
129:
125:
120:
116:
112:
108:
104:
103:
100:
97:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
66:
65:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
706:
703:
678:
670:
646:
578:— Preceding
516:
505:
498:
479:
459:
437:
399:— Preceding
391:
368:
343:
281:
263:
241:
227:
215:
209:
201:
194:
188:
182:
176:
166:
153:
75:
71:
67:
49:
47:
31:
28:
584:86.6.31.117
540:WP:ONEEVENT
490:WP:ONEEVENT
238:WP:ONEEVENT
192:free images
74:(i.e., not
650:WP:TOOSOON
556:WP:TOOSOON
544:WP:NOTNEWS
501:" So what?
486:WP:SOAPBOX
442:Daily Mail
375:WP:NOTNEWS
352:WP:NOTNEWS
348:WP:TOOSOON
234:WP:SOAPBOX
84:Randykitty
80:WP:NOTNEWS
54:Randykitty
712:talk page
671:Weak keep
599:says the
395:WP:ORGSIG
328:• Gene93k
308:• Gene93k
37:talk page
714:or in a
580:unsigned
401:unsigned
379:Jersey92
372:WP:PROMO
151:View log
39:or in a
685:WP:BITE
488:around
454:The Tab
446:Varsity
236:around
198:WP refs
186:scholar
124:protect
119:history
689:VQuakr
675:WP:ORG
658:Jytdog
647:Delete
605:Jytdog
548:WP:GNG
510:WP:GNG
482:WP:SPA
452:, and
450:Mirror
448:, The
369:Delete
344:Delete
282:Delete
230:WP:SPA
170:Google
128:delete
50:Delete
677:says
213:JSTOR
174:books
158:Stats
145:views
137:watch
133:links
16:<
693:talk
662:talk
609:talk
588:talk
438:Keep
409:talk
392:Keep
383:talk
332:talk
312:talk
291:T@lk
270:talk
265:Cirt
262:. —
248:talk
243:Cirt
206:FENS
180:news
141:logs
115:talk
111:edit
88:talk
58:talk
628:\\
566:\\
546:or
534:Axl
517:Axl
460:Axl
427:\\
362:\\
286:JFW
220:TWL
149:– (
52:.
695:)
664:)
611:)
590:)
508:"
444:,
411:)
385:)
377:--
346:-
334:)
326:.
314:)
306:.
288:|
272:)
250:)
200:)
143:|
139:|
135:|
131:|
126:|
122:|
117:|
113:|
90:)
60:)
691:(
660:(
607:(
586:(
536::
532:@
522:¤
504:"
497:"
492:.
478:"
465:¤
407:(
381:(
350:/
330:(
310:(
268:(
246:(
224:)
216:·
210:·
202:·
195:·
189:·
183:·
177:·
172:(
164:(
161:)
154:·
147:)
109:(
86:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.