Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dog Home Foundation


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 04:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Dog Home Foundation

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Subject fails WP:NCORP. There are two types of coverage on this subject: shamelessly promotional pieces on various outlets not independent of the organization because they quote the owners or news reportage about an incident of animal cruelty where this organization is typically a mere mention. Without proof that other contributors to this draft have ties to the globally-blocked original author I don't see CSD G5 being possible, although this is the sort of thing undeclared paid editors would be involved with. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 23:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and India.  Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 23:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't know. The coverage is pretty broad, if a little simpering - but this is pretty par for the course in India. The controversy with the doctor did hit the mainstream national media. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I came to know through newspapers which went viral in recent times
 * A dog was subjected to a lot of cruelty and in that context this NGO took a very good step and take legal action against him with a very strong check
 * Which touched everyone's heart all over India, during that time I came to know about Sanju and I searched, I found Tej, then I thought it appropriate to edit on it.
 * We did not get much information online, but on the basis of what we got, we ended this page.
 * sorry if there is any error Qhqofficial2022 (talk) 11:21, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Who is this "we" you are referring to? ~Anachronist (talk) 00:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * At present the name of the NGO and their work was covered by all the media all over India, and I am now the new editor, I thought I should make a page with their name, but the draft was made, so I tried to edit Qhqofficial2022 (talk) 11:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Organizations,  and Rajasthan.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:ORGCRIT. All of the press either lacks independence or is associated with a single event involving a court case filed by the orgasnization. The disturbing video attached to the case made international news; but it's really the act of the dog being tied to a car and dragged that is the focus of those stories, and not the company itself. I wouldn't consider these sources significant indepth coverage of the company itself to establish notability.4meter4 (talk) 19:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above. Uhai (talk) 16:56, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:ORGDEPTH coverage of purely local events, incidents, controversies, WP:RS Reliable sources, generally, are third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. The best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments. According to me this is a non profit organization, media has supported by coming forward. should keep Maddykkv2022 (talk) 01:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * That is an invalid rationale. There is no WP:CORP compliance coverage of the company. That isn't the same as "coverage of purely local events, incidents, controversies." ~Anachronist (talk) 00:19, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. The kind of promotional reporting cited here isn't what's needed. Sources either are not independent of the company or they are about a single event. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:22, 11 October 2022 (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.