Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern exposure rescue
- 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 delete. MBisanz talk 03:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Northern exposure rescue (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non-notable organization. This is the second incarnation of this article, the first previously deleted had proper capitalization. No proper explanation as to why the speedy deletion tag was removed. 14 Gogle hits, nothing in Google news. Corvus cornixtalk 23:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I removed it because I wanted to take a closer look at the article. After I did, I felt there was a weak assertion of notability. I was in the process of composing a message on your talk page informing you of this and recommending AFD while you were doing the AFD.--Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately google news is not a true reflection of the the world news and should not be used as gauge of popularity. Google itself and other search engines do produce more results. In any case 14 is more than enough! The article has been edited to now include proper capitalization. You are correct that this is the second version of this article after the comments of others were taken onboard. Clowe01 (talk) 00:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, 14 Google hits is not more than enough. Please read WP:RS. Corvus cornixtalk 01:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Note: I quickly converted many of the raw external links to {{cite web}}s and wikilinks to make it easier to check out. Just noting that you're free to review an older revision if you believe I might have messed up a relevant citation. None of the links in the article show non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. From what I can tell, none of the links outside of the organization's own page even mention Northern Exposure Rescue. They're just coverage or trivial listings for the named events. The only link that goes to a reliable source, the Telegraph article, contains no mention of the article's subject. Notability is not inherited by peripheral participation in notable events. TheMolecularMan (talk) 01:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - admirable but not notable org. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:24, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - the referencing provided don't constitute reliable sources, and I've not found anythign else that really supports notability -- Whpq (talk) 16:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I cant see any notabillity at all. abf /talk to me/ 19:16, 22 September 2008 (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.