- 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 keep. Tone 06:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Hazon (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:GNG and WP:NORG. Article has been tagged as "no citations" for the last 8 years. I didn't find any significant coverage by reliable sources. Normal Op (talk) 23:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Normal Op (talk) 23:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. 23:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 16:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I have added the sources found which include 2 in-depth articles from WP:RS exclusively on the organisation plus some significative coverage in other articles in RS. The article needs improving but I think I have done enough to show notability there are a lot more sources that can be added if needs be. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:25, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I just noted that there were a lot of sources in an earlier version that was quite rightly IMO deemed to be too promotional by @MER-C: who reverted to a version that had no sources which had been tagged as such at the time (2012). So it is incorrect to say that it had been tagged for 8 years with "no citations". Before nominating it is useful to look through the history to see if there is nothing salvageable from earlier versions. --Dom from Paris (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I just checked your additions. Good effort, but a company isn't notable because it sends a C&D notice to another organization, has bike ride fundraisers, or lays off people during COVID-19. A lot of the others were brief mentions. The only really good coverage was the marinij.com article. So far, that is not "significant coverage". When doing BEFORE, I DID notice some of these items such as bike rides, COVID layoffs, and the brief mentions, but I deemed my search leading to "not notable" and therefore wasn't worth my time to update the article. Normal Op (talk) 17:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree the fact that they sent a C&D notice or that they have laid off people or organised bike rides is not in itself a claim to notability but the fact that local national and international outlets have picked it up and done full length pieces about it is. You are confusing the event itself and the coverage. The guideline says "A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." not that what they cover has to be independently notable. This is not trivial coverage. I've added a few more articles that are in-depth cover in independent RS notably Daily Camera The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles etc, some coverage of the founder The Forward. Yes these are almost all exclusively Jewish publications but they are longstanding reliable sources some of which are local but some are national and international. I have added an article from WDIV-TV and the Times of Israel. Anyway I may have refbombed the article a little but I hope that gives anyone else coming to !vote some food for thought as you seem to have made your mind up already. A good tip when nominating is say what you found in a before search and explain why you don't think it points to notability. --Dom from Paris (talk) 18:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Also another top tip for looking for sources before nominating is the organisation's own "In the Media" page. here yes they will be only positive but there are literally hundreds in there which may help to find what you couldn't in the before search. --Dom from Paris (talk) 18:43, 19 August 2020 (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.