Wikipedia:WikiProject Organizations/Taskforce-Notability Information & Wikipedia:WikiProject Organizations/Taskforce-Notability Links at HealthHaven.com

Archives
Archive 1 - Notices from 2007

[edit] Organizations deletion

[edit] Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts may be tagged using: {{subst:spa|username}}

(Find sources: "Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

Blatant advertising. OutlawSpark (talk) 23:59, 11 December 2009 (UTC) Nominator is a blocked sockpuppet. Fences&Windows 02:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Internationally useful, supportive non-profit organization. Keep: primary author--EMedMD 00:21, 12 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emedmd (talk • contribs) — Emedmd (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Weak Keep I'm not sure about notability, but I do think the promotional tone could be removed.RadManCF (talk) 00:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete No evidence of notability, no refs except their own website. Other comparable organizations, such as the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors, do not have a Wikipedia page. ==MelanieN (talk) 03:53, 12 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
Keep This group is non-profit, educates and is accessed by many medical students. Individual residency programs already have wiki pages. (eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCLA/VA_Multicampus_PM&R_Residency_Program) Informational, not advertising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srudkin (talk • contribs) 16:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC) — Srudkin (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
"'Keep'" This group is a non profit that provides guidance to both medical students, residents, and junior faculty. Most importantly, CORD is the non-profit body of EM residency directors, it is not trying to recruit members because most if not all residency programs are members of the organization. Instead, it is important that wikipedia is used to disseminate this information because all interested candidates in emergency medicine should have EM trained physicians use the CORD letter of recommendation when applying for residency training. Most allopathic medical students know this, but many osteopathic and international medicine graduates do not realize this. -- pinbor1 — Pinbor1 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Delete - If you review the article history, you will see that not only is it promotional in nature, but has in fact been copied directly from the organisation's web site. I can find no reliable sources writing about the organisation and as such, it fails to meet notability criteria. -- Whpq (talk) 17:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Speedy keep – nomination by sock of de facto banned user Pickbothmanlol. MuZemike 04:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment I don't understand the rationale for the "keep" votes above. We judge articles by Wikepedia standards, not by whether we admire the subject. The article does not even assert notability, much less demonstrate it. The only reference is the organization's own website. And the identity of the nominator should be irrelevant; judge the article on its merits (or lack of same). This one could almost qualify for speedy delete under A7, "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant."--MelanieN (talk) 15:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
Point of Clarification Can I ask why the AARP is considered a notable organization but CORD would not be considered one? Is it just a matter of getting additional citations. Is it just a matter of beefing up the subject matter? i.e. if there was citation of Emergency Medicine regarding CORD would that make it notable. For example the various EM organizations cite CORD, and CORD is an organizational body that puts out consensus statements regarding the education of emergency medicine residents. just looking for clarification---pinbor1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinbor1 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 19 December 2009 (UTC) — Pinbor1 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

"Can I ask why the AARP is considered a notable organization but CORD would not be considered one?" Are you serious? AARP has 40 million members and is considered the second largest organization in the United States, surpassed only by the Roman Catholic Church. In contrast, how many directors of Emergency Medicine residencies are there? in the country A few dozen? Maybe as many as a hundred? A Google search for AAPR returns 6 million hits, including 3700 from Google News. A Google search for the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors includes 6400 hits, including NONE from Google News. Try not to reduce your arguments to absurdity.-MelanieN (talk) 04:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fences&Windows 02:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I've relisted due to the issues with sockpuppets and SPAs. Fences&Windows 02:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 02:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 02:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep article is a reasonably good stub at the moment. Notability concerns don't seem compelling to me. Jclemens (talk) 04:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Revolutionary Workers Party (Trotskyist–Posadist) (USA)

(Find sources: "Revolutionary Workers Party (Trotskyist–Posadist) (USA)" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

Can find absolutely no independent coverage from acceptable sources. Fails to meet WP:GNG by a long chalk. Brilliantine (talk) 13:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Shipleys of Maryland

(Find sources: "Shipleys of Maryland" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

WP:NN club Toddst1 (talk) 00:47, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete: Near to a textbook case of WP:NOTMEMORIAL; this organization seems only to plump up this particular family. No independent sources, fails WP:ORG. There are a handful of Google News hits, most in obituaries, and none about the organization. Article created by a SPA who hasn't been active for over a year, and no other editors have made substantive improvements since; it's carried maintenance tags for a year. Article is orphaned as well. RGTraynor 09:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] IRMOS Project

(Find sources: "IRMOS Project" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

This is yet another article on an FP7 project, part of a ongoing effort to get articles on Framework Programme projects onto Wikipedia. This article was created by User:Irmos-FP7. As I stated in my prod tag, this IRMOS Project, "Interactive Realtime Multimedia Applications on Service Oriented Infrastructures" is not notable by Wikipedia's usual standards, with no independent third party sources. The Google hits one finds for IRMOS are for Infrared Multi-Object spectrometer instead. Abductive (reasoning) 12:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Mm40 (talk) 12:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:45, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. -- John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete. In addition to notability concerns, this is an example of prose that, while superficially grammatical, is so confused that nobody could reasonably be expected to make sense of it. An integrated optimisation approach at various levels from inter-organisation business processes and SLAs to intelligent networking and virtualisation techniques that enable real-time interaction and concurrency at all points of value chains. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete. What an unencyclopedic article. Agree with the above, also add that this seems to consist largely of hopeful expectations for the future (see "Expected Impact" section). Little value in retaining this. --Glenfarclas (talk) 16:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete only exceptionally will this kind of projects be notable, and this one is no exception... --Crusio (talk) 17:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 2004 Racism Watch

(Find sources: "2004 Racism Watch" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

This has had a {{notability}} tag for a year, either it should be deleted or the tag removed. As far as I can tell, the google news hits mentioning it are reporting what it says, not discussing the group itself. Do they make it notable? Polarpanda (talk) 11:44, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 02:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete. Apparently, even having a big name such as Ed Asner as a spokesman wasn't enough to get this organization off the ground. All I could find as a source was a widely disseminated press release. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:48, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete. A group focused on protesting a single TV ad? As WP:CORP says, we may for a non-commercial organization we may look at "[t]he organization’s longevity, size of membership, or major achievements." As best I can tell, it was a failure, failure, failure. --Glenfarclas (talk) 04:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep It's never a failure to speak up for what you believe is right. This was an organization of notable people involved in notable events, and covered in secondary sources. Not a major topic, I wouldn't have bothered to write an article on it, but still worth keeping. Steve Dufour (talk) 05:00, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Camp Roanoke

(Find sources: "Camp Roanoke" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

Fails WP:CORP. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep. I added some references. – Eastmain (talk) 15:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Tau Alpha Upsilon

(Find sources: "Tau Alpha Upsilon" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

I restored this as a contested prod per a request at WP:REFUND, but in searching for sources to add to meet WP:Notability, I'm striking out. Gnews has 10 hits, all of which are passing mentions. The first several pages of ghits are passing mentions; gbooks has directory entries. The editor who requested the restoration at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Current_requests#Tau_Alpha_Upsilon admits that sources may not be available. Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:59, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete Fraternity at a single college. Nothing notable asserted. When references can't be found, I consider these probably suitable for AfD A7, though coming here never hurts. DGG ( talk ) 04:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC) .

Sources are in fact available under the University web page, and under their records. (SUNY Binghamton). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.125.174.144 (talk) 04:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 03:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete. No significant coverage in any reliable sources. The few press items listed on their website are coverage of events the fraternity was associated with, mentioning the group itself only in passing. --RL0919 (talk) 03:47, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Catalyst Collective

(Find sources: "The Catalyst Collective" — search, news, books, scholar, images )

offshoot of the notable CrimethInc., but they, themselves, haven't done anything newsworthy yet. Hopefully nothing will get blown up now that I've said that. Pirate^Argh!!1! 10:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

There's a little bit of coverage here [1] and something here [2] so perhaps they can be merged into the parent article. Polarpanda (talk) 11:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I hadn't finished the article - I'm new to wikipedia. Anyway, there's more info available for them like they participated in and helped supply the two week Feral Futures Call For Direct Action Camp in Summer 2009 (http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20090416163631815) at the Piedra River in Southern Colorado, an event which hosted a stop on the Earth First! RoadShow's 2009 tour (http://colorado.indymedia.org/node/1730). I just ask that you guys keep the article up so it can be expanded on. It's a group of organizers not saboteurs so I doubt they'll be blowing anything up anytime soon, but I still think they're worth a couple paragraphs. While we're at it, I think Feral Futures deserves a page too, and Black Mesa Indigenous Support, but maybe I'm misunderstanding what is worthy of a wikipedia article. Anyway, I was going to continue expanding on this article, adding philosophy and such, which differs considerably from the overarching CrimethInc. group, but I guess I'll wait and see if it gets deleted before I do. Greenrevolutionary (talk) 18:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenrevolutionary (talk • contribs) 14:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:15, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 03:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete This coincidentally-similar-to-my-username group doesn't appear notable, and it isn't covered in any reliable sources (Google only turns up self-published material and other uses of the name, there are no relevant news documents, and the only book sources refer to an organization from the 1970s.) As for the two sources mentioned by Polarpanda, both were published before the subject of the article was founded and therefore must be referring to different groups. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 04:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete per the above and WP:ORG. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:04, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Notability Task Force

[edit] Guidelines

[edit] Deletion review