Aid Worker Security Database: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:34, 17 February 2020

Revision as of 16:31, 18 April 2020

Line 1:

{{AFC submission|||u=HumOutcomes|ns=118|ts=20200128133823}} <!-- Do not remove this line! -->

{{AFC submission|d|reason|<!-- Template:Talkspin -->

This draft is a request to [[WP:SPINOUT|spin out]] an article, a form of [[WP:SPLIT|splitting]]. Proposals to spin out a topic from an article into another stand-alone article should be discussed at the talk page of the existing article.

This does not mean that the draft should be spun out, and it does not mean that the draft should not be spun out. It does mean that discussion should be on the talk page of the existing article. (If this draft is resubmitted without discussion on the talk page of the existing article, it may be Rejected or [[WP:MFD|nominated for deletion]].) Discuss at [[Talk:Attacks on humanitarian workers]]. Spinning out an article should reflect a rough consensus at the parent article talk page.|u=HumOutcomes|ns=118|decliner=Robert McClenon|declinets=20200117064746|reason2=mergeto|details2=Attacks on humanitarian workers|ts=20191205150112}} <!-- Do not remove this line! -->

|u=HumOutcomes|ns=118|decliner=Robert McClenon|declinets=20200117064746|reason2=mergeto|details2=Attacks on humanitarian workers|ts=20191205150112}} <!-- Do not remove this line! -->

{{AFC submission|d|web|u=HumOutcomes|ns=118|demo=|decliner=Worldbruce|declinets=20191023000651|small=yes|ts=20190627181826}} <!-- Do not remove this line! -->

{{Draft article}}

{{AFC comment|1=Since my initial comment 6 months ago, I see a number of references have been added. Looking over them, most appear to either be documents from the UN or what look like passing mentions from government reports.

It was suggested by [[User:Worldbruce]] that [[WP:NWEB]] is the appropriate guideline to use for judging notability here. I'm not 100% sure that's correct, [[WP:NGO]] might be more appropriate. In any case, please look at those two, and also read [[WP:THREE]]. If you could list here in the comments the three best sources which establish this meets either of those guidelines, that would be a great help to the next person who reviews this. -- [[User:RoySmith|RoySmith]] [[User Talk:RoySmith|(talk)]] 16:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)}}

{{AFC comment|1=The subject-specific guideline that applies is [[WP:NWEB]]. The draft's lead says that according to ''The New York Times'', the database "is widely regarded as an authoritative reference for aid organisations and governments in assessing trends in security threats." Reliable sources frequently cite the database in its subject area, so I think the ''NYT'' is right. But my reading of [[WP:WEBCRIT]] is that web notability is not demonstrated by the database being cited frequently (unlike the guidelines for [[WP:PROF|academics]] and for [[WP:NMEDIA|newspapers, magazines, and academic journals]]). Instead, the database itself needs to be the subject of multiple, independent, non-trivial works.

Line 19 ⟶ 22:

----

{{Draft article}}

<!-- EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --><br />

Line 89 ⟶ 94:

* [https://aidworkersecurity.org/ Official website]

* [https://www.humanitarianoutcomes.org/ Humanitarian Outcomes website]

{{AFC submission|||ts=20200128133823|u=HumOutcomes|ns=118}}