Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Students Supporting Street Kids

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. The lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject means that the subject does not meet the notability guidelines for inclusion. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Students Supporting Street Kids

Promotion of a nonnotable charity - 7-bubёn >t 16:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article needs work, but I think ghits just about establishes N. I'll chat to the creator about how to improve etc. Chzz ► 16:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- J^mundo 16:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, with no prejudice against recreation. There are zillions of charities which occasionally pop up in newspapers. This article does not provide independent sources for the info. Occasional mentions, without details, in local newspapers don't count. Mukadderat (talk) 01:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete That light scattering of news really doesn't impress me much. Gigs (talk) 01:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete very little third party coverage [1] LibStar (talk) 01:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - Not spectacurally notable, but it does work with some pretty big schools. This has potential to be notable, but it needs some work first.--Unionhawk ^Talk 01:56, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - by a read of the assertions the article makes, it certainly sounds notable, but I really can't find any substantial third-party coverage to either demonstrate notability or comply with the verifiability policy. This is strange given the purported extent of this charity, but it certainly seems to be the case. ~ mazca ^t|c 02:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete G-hits alone cannot establish notability. Until there are the references required for notability an verifiablity it needs to go. Who's to say it's not a scam? Drawn Some (talk) 03:06, 4 May 2009 (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.