Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coram's Fields User Group


 * 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. You will need to improve the sourcing before this will merit an article. Spartaz Humbug! 06:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Coram's Fields User Group

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Small local group dedicated to a small local park. Already speedied once and recreated, so I suppose we'll go for a full discussion. There's basically nothing available as far as sources go, and the closest thing to to a claim of notability is their 53 followers on facebook. I'm not entirely sure the organization is notable enough to make it a plausible redirect. G M G talk   13:12, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Coram's Fields user group represents approximately 500 local members and approximately 1000 followers, working on long term issues relating to the development of Coram's Fields. Coram's Fields is a notable park of historic significance in England, and one of the largest in London. Its cultural importance stems from it being on the location of the Foundling Hospital, which spawned several significant charities, some of them amongst the oldest in the world, and all related to children (e.g. Thomas Coram Foundation for Children, Great Ormond Street Hospital. The Facebook membership for the group is less relevant as a statistic as it appears not used for exchange. The group has been officially recognised by the Council User:Pavic 14:00, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't doubt that the park itself is probably appropriate for an article, as many physical locations are, with at times an overall lower standard for notability in practice than other subjects. The question is whether the community organization simply exists, or whether it has received sustained in depth coverage in independent reliable sources, usually things like newspapers, magazines and books, and explicitly excluding things like their official wordpress blog, and passing routine coverage like a registration with the city counsel.  G M G  talk   14:08, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 15:10, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 15:10, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

The groups seems quite vibrant with activities. Here are additional references. Second AGM with lecture, Guest Lecture: Girls in Sport: Hafiza Patel & Yashmin Harun (MSA), or the reference to the first AGM in 2016. The group posts regular Newsletter to approximately 1000 addressees. There is an interesting article in the local Camden press by the group, prior to the actual formation. Some of these references may prove of value? User:Pavic 15:20, 19 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The group is a year old, it has apparently tiny membership, and the references are highly local. I speedied this before reasons other than notability, but if this gets an article, every tiny local organisation will qualify Jimfbleak - talk to me?  07:02, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi all. As explained above the group is quite significant, with close to 1000 local followers and a significant membership. The key to the group's importance is the importance of the park itself. The location is a "Foundling hospital" location, which has undergone changes several times in its history, but represents one of the first charities in the world and derives from Thomas Coram. In 1935, the local residents (in a similar fashion) created a major fundraising effort to buy the park from a property developer. This is a landmark community action, which has historic importance. The User group continues this heritage. I.e. without local grouping of residents the park would not exist either. Hope this helps? Pavic - Happy days!  14.51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Pavic, I expect it may be helpful to review Notability (organizations and companies), which is the standard by which articles such as these are kept or deleted.  G M G  talk   15:07, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * GreenMeansGo, Thank you, reviewing. I understand this might be neither here nor there in terms of obvious notability, it is a young organisation, which would become of more importance if it had more media coverage for example (e.g. Greenpeace moving from obscure to well known). One element that is particularly worthy however, is the strength of local community action as exemplified in the Fundraising for the park preservation in 1935 and now, as well as presence of Thomas Coram as a guiding light, which spans a whole range of significant children organisations in the UK. Happy days!  16:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * GreenMeansGo, Some more editing. I expect this historic link is very valuable, I have added some basic info and a poster, which links these two communities. The link is in the spirit of the preservation of the park, and it partially provides an argument about historic continuity and historic mission. Hope this will be appreciated in correct light. Thank you. Happy days!  17:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The problem is that notability is not inherited. It really doesn't matter how historic the park is, or how many people have written about the park. What matters is whether there is sustained in-depth coverage of the group itself, written in reliable sources that are independent of the group.  G M G  talk   17:23, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I do see your point. Some articles are relevant in that sense, such as the Camden New Journal - did you see that one? If that is not enough, I suppose they will become notable when and if the local media such as Camden new Journal or Evening Standard start writing about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavic (talk • contribs) 18:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I understand some articles in media are planned for the end of the year/beginning of the new year. Would that help? Happy days!  18:19, 21 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Local group lacking notability. They run a park. Refs are routine in nature. Article should not have been recreated after speedy delete. Szzuk (talk) 08:45, 26 December 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.