Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autonomous Centre of Edinburgh


 * 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 - there is consensus that the sources added during the AfD demonstrate notability. Thryduulf (talk) 13:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Autonomous Centre of Edinburgh

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Of the sources only 1 covers the subject in depth and this is from 2007 in Peace News. Difficult to know what their readership is (nothing found) but they have less than 2k followers on FB. The book only makes a very very short passing mention of ACE and the other sources only list them as a signatory. fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG Domdeparis (talk) 16:23, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:55, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:55, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment There is some more discussion, including in academic works; I added a link to a 2-page account by Chris Atton who has also written about it elsewhere. But I am concerned that there's a network of related articles about not very notable organisations and publications also including Counter Information and Edinburgh unemployed workers centre which could probably be merged. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:18, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:07, 31 May 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I was skeptical at first, but this organization was lucky enough to attract significant attention from scholars. For example, it seems to have been a subject of case study done in this book: over several pages (~60+). That is likely sufficient for notability. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  06:08, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability established based on sources added or cited since start of AfD. Other related articles can be dealt with separately. --Colapeninsula (talk) 08:51, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Added sources show significant coverage in independent, reliable sources and thus passes GNG. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:53, 17 June 2017 (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.