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. Michig (talk) 08:17, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Action Deafness

[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Action Deafness

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

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

The article does not appear to meet notability guidelines for organisations. The only secondary source I have found is this article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-ouch-26866338, which only mentions Action Deafness in passing. CircleGirl (talk) 01:12, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just some further comments-

Action Deafness appears to only work in Leicester and nearby areas. WP:ORG#non-commercial organisations advises that a non-commercial organisation should be national or international in scope to be noteable, unless there is something exceptional about the organisation that makes it noteable. Also, regarding Rich's comment that there are more sources cited in the history of the article- I have had a look through the history. For most of the article's history, no sources are cited. However, at one point the article cited two articles https://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/registerhomepage.aspx (all charities in the UK have a page on this site, so in my opinion, it doesn't show that an organisation is notable). The second article is this: http://www.loughboroughecho.net/news/loughborough-news/2009/07/08/group-to-be-homeless-as-chapel-is-to-close-73871-24106512/ However, it only mentions Action Deafness in passing, so I'm not sure if this really demonstrates that the organisation is noteable.CircleGirl (talk) 05:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 December 12. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:54, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 December 12. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:48, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:01, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If you look kn the history of the article there are a couple of sources. I will look later and see if more can be found. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 06:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC).[reply]

The Church Among Deaf People, London, 1997, P. 8. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 06:25, 12 December 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Rich, and what is this source? Is it a book? An article? A brochure? Did you verify it has in-depth coverage of the subject? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:35, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unfortunately it doesn't look like this charity passes WP:NORG. I am having difficulty finding reliable secondary sources. SportingFlyer talk 08:15, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Admirable mission, fails WP:NORG - no in-depth coverage, no awards, etc. Just an NGO doing their little bit to make the world a bit better. Admirable, but non-encyclopedic. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete it's simply not notable. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:18, 21 December 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.