Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axios (organization)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Axios (organization)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Nominating for deletion because the article has no sources independent of the organization itself, and I have been unable to locate any. This puts it in clear violation of guidelines for notability of groups and organizations. (Please note that the criterion is not whether the group sounds interesting or important to Wikipedia editors; the point is whether independent reliable sources have found the organization to be notable enough to write about.) I have only been able to find a few websites about the organization: The first two have not been updated in many years; the last appears not to have been updated in at least a year. All appear to be self-promotion by the group itself. None provides enough information to verify any important facts about the group (like how many members does it have, who are its leaders...). I have not found any articles about the group from independent sources. Consequently there is no way to independently verify that the group is notable, that any of the facts stated about it in the article are true, or that it even exists. Mrhsj (talk) 20:01, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.eskimo.com/~nickz/axios.html
 * http://www.qrd.org/QRD/www/orgs/axios/
 * http://www.axios.org


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  - ℅ &#10032; ALLST☆R &#10032; echo 03:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  —- ℅ &#10032; ALLST☆R &#10032; echo 03:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

(Cite is "At the Foot of the Capitol, Capital Pride," By Michelle Boorstein, Washington Post Staff Writer, Monday, June 16, 2008; Page B02.) Bearian (talk) 01:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - perfectly well-known the the LGBT community, large group meets at least monthly in NYC, easy to verify. Bearian (talk) 01:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC) I found at least one reliable source - the Washington Post - here  in about 45 seconds of a GS.  Please see WP:BEFORE. Bearian (talk) 01:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Washington Post source already pointed out, this Google Books source for the book Homosexuality and religion: an encyclopedia by Jeffrey S. Siker, this Google Books source for the book Christian Science: Its Encounter with Lesbian/Gay America by Bruce Stores, this Google Books source for the book Sexual orientation and gender expression in social work practice: working with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people by Deana F. Morrow and Lori Messinger, Greenbelt Interfaith News and this 2008 New York Q News article mentioning Axios and their 25th anniversary. - ℅ &#10032; ALLST☆R &#10032; echo 01:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Regarding Google Books, here's a general search that shows many books that include/reference/cite this organization. - ℅ &#10032; ALLST☆R &#10032; echo 02:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per notability asserted and easily found. Passing WP:ORG is a slam dunk. Any concerns with aricle's style can be addressed through WP:CLEANUP, not WP:AFD.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Well known organization, and easy to verify. Zazaban (talk) 06:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no reliable independent sources that discuss this topic? No encyclopedia article. It's an article entirely sourced to the org's website.Bali ultimate (talk) 16:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That the article needs more sources is a matter for cleanup, specially since the sources have been amply demonstrated to exist. Opinioning a delete when in-depth independent sources have been shown to exist for an easily fixable article is contrary to WP:AFD and WP:ATD.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree with above that the organization is well-known in LGBT community, especially in major cities in the US. Passes WP:ORG and perhaps needs clean-up, but not deletion.  Would also note that they've participated (via amicus briefs) in notable civil rights lawsuits -  Varnent (talk) 22:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * In agreement and because no one seemed to be on it, I performed some minor copyedit and added a little sourcing... I note with raised eyebrows the large number of hits at Google Scholar and Google Books and wonder what the nom's own search parameters were. Point being it's in the news, it's in in books, and it's being cited by others. It's notable, and a slam-dunk pass of WP:ORG.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 05:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Snowball Keep following Schmidt's improvements. FeydHuxtable (talk) 18:48, 30 April 2009 (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.