Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Federation of Materials Handling - FEM


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 00:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

European Federation of Materials Handling - FEM

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested PROD. Insufficient evidence of notability found despite repeated searches over the last month --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment The creator of this article originally asked about putting this into article space in December (Help_desk/Archives/2009_December_18) and a week ago (Help_desk/Archives/2010_January_19). I PRODed the article, and the creator removed the PROD with the edit summary I do not agree on the decision to delete the article for insufficient evidence of notability) --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Added 3 alternative 'findsources' --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry PhantomSteve, it is nothing personal but I removed the PROD for deletion and I just wrote a small sentence to justify it because I did not know where to put my entire reply. Actually I put in in talks, but I can rewrite it here:

The reason why I do not agree to delete the article due to lack of notability is the following: according to wikipedia's notability requirement, organizations are usually notable if 1 - the scope of their activities is national or international in scale, and if 2 - information about the organization and its activities can be verified by third-party, independent, reliable sources. (In other words, they must satisfy the primary criterion for all organizations as described above.). And also “Reliable sources may therefore be published materials with a reliable publication process; they may be authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject in question; or they may be both”. We meet the first criterion. As regards the second, the fact that FEM does not appear in the mainstream press has little to do with notability but rather with the specific scope of the association. In addition, references to FEM appear on the European Commission’s website and I dare qualify the European Commission as a ‘reliable source’. I am afraid we have made every possible effort. Thanks Cipresso (talk) 14:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: As I said at Help desk/Archives/2009 December 18, all of the references I could find were trade-related (normally just in a list of organisations, or a mention that the FEM have standards) - none of them are about the organisation itself - they confirm the existance of the organisation itself, but nothing further than that - and I never doubted that they exist. I said a similar thing almost a month later when you asked about this at Help desk/Archives/2010 January 19. With regards to their mention on the European Commision's website, it is included in a List of trade federations with liaison status - again, confirming that they exist, but not (I feel) the significant coverage mentioned in the notability guidelines. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  —--  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  —--  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Cipresso (talk) 15:04, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment:Thanks for your reply. I understand your point of view, but honestly I see other organisations/associations in wikipedia, with less notable references than the one of my article. But at the end who is gonna to decide what? I mean, somebody else could find that my references are enough and satisfying. How can I know this?

Cipresso (talk) 15:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Ah ok, thanks, I just saw your reply! thanks for teh information...nothing personally of course!
 * For the benefit of other editors: I explained on Cipresso's talk page about how AfDs are left open for a week, and that after that time, an admin will judge the consensus based on the arguments for/against deleting the article --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 15:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability per Wikipedia guidelines. And note that arguments that "other stuff exists" are not helpful in these discussions. ukexpat (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2010 (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.