Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captive Animals Protection Society


 * 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 no consensus due to low participation. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 10:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Captive Animals Protection Society

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As it stands, the subject does not appear to pass the notability guidelines. Before I found it in an odd reference on a music festival page, it had 7 refs, 5 of which were to the same page on the group's website, one of which was dead (a daily mail article hosted on some Irish Circus website?), and the other two are a passing mention by the BBC and a feature in the Thurrock Gazette. It seems to just be a puff page at this point. — Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 08:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. I've added some references to the article that demonstrate this organisation meets WP:ORG. A legacy animal rights organisation, CAPS has been around for over 50 years and was instrumental in persuading Blackpool Tower Circus to cease using animals. Their undercover investigations, reports, and ongoing protests regularly receive significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. As a side note, while the article was indeed overly reliant on primary sources, just deleting them all makes it more difficult to improve the article. Gobōnobō  + c 23:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Keep: per Gobōnobō - Ret.Prof (talk) 18:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MJ94 (talk) 00:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Automatic Strikeout  ( T  •  C ) 04:06, 21 January 2013 (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.