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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Previously nominated via
WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit14:49, 18 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to
World Jewish Congress I have evaluated the references. The first reference covers the organization rejoining the World Jewish Congress. The second source is an interview with a member of the organization, but does not cover anything about it. I conducted a Google search and saw some articles (including
onenot independent of the subject), social media accounts, and insignificant mentions of the group. However, I found these:
[1],
[2],
[3]. Let me know what you think about these sites' abilities to establish the article's notability. --
LPS and MLP Fan (
Littlest Pet Shop and
My Little Pony Fan)
20:22, 18 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak keep - Even nom acknowledges that sources exist. Some are reliable and independent, while others lack depth; this is probably due it being something of an ad-hoc advocacy offshoot of WJC. In addition to what LPS found, I found
this, which mentions campus activity, and
this trivial mention.
WP:SPINOUTs of offshoot organisations are definitely permitted, especially since the
World Jewish Congress, at almost 15k words and
200kb, is simply
WP:TOOBIG to add on an additional topic like this one, which can be expanded a little further. And while I said "weak" (because we should be mindful of
WP:ORGCRIT) I think there is just enough to go on.
Havradimleaf a message08:24, 19 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Merge to
World Jewish Congress as
WP:ATD. This is an organization therefore NCORP guidelines apply. As per
WP:SIRS *each* reference must meet the criteria for establishing notability - the quantity of coverage is irrelevant so long as we find a minimum of two.
WP:NCORP requires multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with
in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing
"Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. This is usually the criteria where most references fail. References cannot rely only on information provided by the company, quotations, press releases, announcements, interviews fail ORGIND. Whatever is left over must also meet CORPDEPTH.
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.