Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fair Play For Women


 * 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 redirect to 2021 United Kingdom census.  Sandstein  11:11, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Fair Play For Women
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a group which have only appeared in the news in relation to minor campaigning issues related to other issues, they also bought a few judicial reviews which got some media coverage. The cases in and of themself should have articles if they are notable court cases. The subject area they operate within is very controversial and generate hysterical media coverage of minor events. This does though not establish the wider notability of this organisation. The article has relied upon primary sources and a now depreciated source. While people who agree and disagree with their political stance may consider them to be notable there is not an establishment of wider notability of this group outside of bringing some newsworthy court cases which have not gone beyond being news reporting and have not established notability for this group. If this group is deemed to be notable it would substantially lower the bar for groups of any flavour to be considered notable.

Having looked at the news articles they crop up in, they themself are not the subjects of these articles and appear to be a media press release factory, making commentary on the issues they have an interest in without ever being notable themself to be in the subject. The ONS court case, which as I have said, the case itself and not the group bringing it are what is notable if at all.
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:37, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:37, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:37, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:37, 19 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect The article is unclear about the status of the organisation or its purpose. There is no indication of the size or budget of the organisation. From its website there is reason to suspect that it might be little more than a one person organisation. There is no company registration number, list of board members or indication of budget. The article does detail a little about its activities but these do not seem to add up to anything even close to notability. The Google links do not suggest that there is anything substantial to add that would make a difference to that evaluation. In fact, the only thing I found that might possibly merit addition was the fact that they took out a full page advert in Metro but, like the horrible tweets, this relates to their media activities rather than to anything more substantial. The census paperwork challenge is the only item here worthy of brief mention in an encyclopaedia. That is already covered in sufficient detail at 2021 United Kingdom census so I suggest we redirect to that. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:48, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * BTW, I found their listing at Companies House and it does not give me any reason to revise my opinion. --DanielRigal (talk) 00:10, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect Sources suggest this doesn't pass WP:SUSTAINED as the notable coverage is only about one event. Rab V (talk) 17:26, 21 June 2021 (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.