Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Association of Radical Midwives

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.

The result was withdrawn by nom. (non-admin closure) » Shadowowl | talk 20:21, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Radical Midwives

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Association of Radical Midwives (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP, WP:GNG and every other notability guideline. No sources. » Shadowowl | talk 22:26, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Passes WP:GNG as the topic is covered in sources such as English Midwives and the Association of Radical Midwives and Birth of the radicals. Andrew D. (talk) 22:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which prove nothing more than it exists. The first source only mentions AoRM. » Shadowowl | talk 23:16, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep given coverage like this here and this. Drmies (talk) 00:16, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Andrew D. A ten-page article in Women & Health magazine is very clearly significant coverage. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:05, 16 August 2018 (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.