Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center on Animal Liberation Affairs


 * 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. The organization may in due course become notable under its new name. JohnCD (talk) 15:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Center on Animal Liberation Affairs

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Questions of notability, verifiability, and source reliability Liborgone (talk) 18:50, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I should update the above with more specifics. I don't believe the that Center on Animal Liberation Affairs meets Wikipedia's general criteria for sufficient notability for listing. Further, dead links make the Center unverifiable and the sources seem unreliable upon first review. Liborgone (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liborgone (talk • contribs)
 * Delete. I can't find any significant coverage in reliable sources that would demonstrate this group meets the notability threshold. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 20:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - I can't find any independent reliable sources either. Sionk (talk) 22:30, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Its website was here, but doesn't seem to exist now, and there's nothing in the Internet Archive. I don't know whether that means it has closed, or is just temporarily offline. I've added two refs from 2011 (only one of which is independent), edited the article to make the tense neutral as to whether it still exists, and removed some of the unsourced details (diff). I'm leaning toward delete, unless someone can show it's still active, or is notable enough to retain even if now defunct. SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 23:19, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It has changed its name to the Institute for Critical Animal Studies; its website is here. It adopted the new name in 2007; see "about". So the best thing is to create that new article, assuming there are reliable sources for it, and redirect this title to that one. SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 00:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the work SlimVirgin has done in attempting to clean up this article but as put forth, there is no website or even apparent archive for this organization (hardly seems notable in that regard to me). I do see that it is cited in the book Terrorist or Freedom Fighters, but this is by the people who founded the organization. This wouldn't classify as objective reliability and would be more self promotional. Of the new links that have been put, neither seems especially noteworthy. The Best and Nocella book is not verifiable online and not a major popular text otherwise and so does not seem to meet the claims of noteworthiness necessary. The citation to the Sorenson essay is to a single line footnote in a not especially noteworthy book, and the footnote simply says (to paraphrase): See CALA and then lists the URL to a non-functional organizational website.Liborgone (talk) 16:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Liborgone, regarding the Best and Nocella book – Terrorists or Freedom Fighters?: Reflections on the Liberation of Animals – that prompted the creation of the Center on Animal Liberation Affairs (now the Institute for Critical Animal Studies), it is indeed a notable book within animal rights studies. If you look at the table of contents (here on Amazon), you'll see there are essays from quite a few notable figures within the movement, including Tom Regan, Paul Watson, and Ingrid Newkirk. SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 00:12, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi SlimVirgin, my response would be that based on what you argue it might be possible that Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? is a notable book, but that is not the same thing as saying that the Center on Animal Liberation Affairs is notable therefore additionally. Also, I should say while I'm a fan of the book you mention, I'm not sure that containing noteworthy writers is a good enough criterion for the book's notability. Is there a body of verifiable and credible (not connected to the Center on Animal Liberation Affairs or Institute for Critical Animal Studies) references for the notability of the book and its importance for the Center? I think that is what is needed. I haven't found such references myself, hence my conclusion that it is best to delete this page at this time. That it doesn't have a working website and a clear body of solid references seems telling about the notability of this Center. But I've said enough and want to listen to others' comments.Liborgone (talk) 01:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree it's appropriate to delete this for now, Liborgone, as the organization under this name no longer exists. In due course, we can look around for secondary sources for its new name, Institute for Critical Animal Studies, and create that if the sources are out there. SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 03:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete – Even under its new name, it lacks WP:CORPDEPTH and fails to meet WP:BASIC requirements of non-trivial coverage by multiple reliable third-party sources. JFHJr (㊟) 04:04, 12 February 2012 (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.