Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project negative
- 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. A serious and worthy project but one that simply hasn't attained the coverage in reliable sources needed to meet WP:GNG. A short piece in a local newspaper, covering a protest march, for example, is insufficient. A clear consensus to delete. TerriersFan (talk) 21:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Project negative (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Ad0316 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Subject is an "online campaign to raise awareness of the ban in force in the UK on blood donations by gay and bisexual men". No evidence that this is a major campaign. Indeed, only a few local groups in Birmingham (UK) cover the issue, and then not in great detail. Minor student activism. (SPA and COI issues.) Christopher Connor (talk) 02:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete fails WP:WEB and WP:GROUP, no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Earlier versions had highly WP:PROMO tone and unreferenced content suggesting WP:COI, but the main issue here is WP:Notability. Endorsement from one political party is mentioned, but I can find no mention of the project on the party's main site[1], though even this on its own wouldn't be sufficient evidence of a notable campaign. Empty Buffer (talk) 07:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - as per Empty Buffer the issue is notability simply put there is none. Codf1977 (talk) 12:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Lionel (talk) 17:52, 20 July 2010 (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.