Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ann Foundation


 * 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. Jujutacular (talk) 21:53, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Ann Foundation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines and WP:NCORP. This organization has received very little press coverage and most refs are bare mentions or to primary sources. Note this is not the same as Chef Ann FOundation J bh  Talk  16:35, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Not verifiable.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 18:39, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:20, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:20, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm the author of this page. If the 2013 award from the United Nations's Online Volunteering Award (citations 2 and 5) does not constitute verifiability, then I agree that the article should be deleted. However, I would suggest that the UN is a verifiable and reliable source. Also, please note that the organization has done much more than donate a few computers - see article in citation 3 for a full list. Scrycer (talk) 16:45, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The issue is that there is no verification, by independent reliable sources, that the organization is notable by Wikipedia standards . Wikipedia notability is not based on what an organization does it is based on how much is written about it. Some awards may be enough to confer notability on their own but The 'UN Online Volunteering Award' is not one of those. As I explained on the article talk page there needs to be significant coverage int independent reliable sources. I have looked and I have asked you if you know of more than there is in the article. I have found none and you have provided none. Please, if you have further coverage in reliable sources post them or cite them in the article. Cheers. J bh  Talk  22:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete for now and draft and userfy if needed as I'm not seeing much for better improvement. SwisterTwister   talk  05:50, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom and above editors. Not enough in-depth coverage to meet notability criteria.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:19, 17 October 2015 (UTC)


 * 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.