Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations (3rd nomination)


 * 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. Consensus is that the sources provided don't establish notability per WP:GNG or WP:NONPROFIT. ‑Scottywong | spill the beans _ 22:27, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:NONPROFIT i.e: "Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards: The scope of their activities is national or international in scale. Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by multiple, third-party, independent, reliable sources." also fails additional considerations as it is not a "Nationally famous local organization". Delete Jarvis Sherbourne (talk) 01:07, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep There is consistent, numerous news coverage of this organization going back thirty years. There is also book coverage, such as the following:
 * Canada's unemployed, a section here
 * Shelterforce, it's involvement with NDP


 * And a bunch more in Google Books. Silver  seren C 04:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The second reference is a passing reference and I can't see very much re the first reference but it seems to just be their submission to a report. In any case, even if there are some marginal sourcing possibilities there's no indication that their activities are national in scope and they are not a "Nationally famous local organization" so it still fails the tests for WP:NONPROFIT. Jarvis Sherbourne (talk) 12:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You seem to be completely ignoring the entire second point in WP:NONPROFIT, which says "Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by multiple, third-party, independent, reliable sources." Not only has there been thirty years of Toronto Star coverage (enough to fill more than ten pages of Google News search results), there's also been coverage from the Ottawa Citizen and The Financial Post. There's also other books to consider, such as this, this, and this. Furthermore, this source calls it a countrywide tenants' organization and that it is only based in Toronto. Silver  seren C
 * You're ignoring this line "Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards". You have only provided evidence that the article may meet the second standard but you've completely ignored the first ie "The scope of their activities is national or international in scale", as well as the fact that both criteria need to be met. One out of two means the article fails the test for WP:NONPROFIT. Jarvis Sherbourne (talk) 06:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Read my reply above again and then read my reply below. Silver  seren C 06:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment and read mine. Jarvis Sherbourne (talk) 11:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom fails WP:NONPROFIT. Cagoul (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. Get this done this time. Tom Reedy (talk) 03:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * SeeWP:PERNOM. Cagoul above at least says why, albeit in two words, which i've also already refuted in my reply above theirs. Also, your second sentence seems to imply that this is a WP:IDONTLIKEIT vote. Silver  seren C 04:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - No, you haven't refuted anything, you've just parsed the criteria in WP:NONPROFIT and argued the article meets the second criteria while you completely ignore the first criteria and the fact that the policy states that both criteria need to be met. Jarvis Sherbourne (talk) 06:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Did you read my full comment above? It is a national organization. It was merely started in Toronto, but now it has members and chapters all across Canada. Silver  seren C 06:30, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It is not. Your source, which mentions the association once in a book that isn't about tenants or housing but on espionage during the Cold War, got its facts wrong and is contradicted by the organization itself which says:
 * a) of its telephone hotline service: "If you have any questions about your rights as a tenant in Toronto, please call the tenant hotline" and "The Tenant Hotline is a free telephone counseling service for tenants in Toronto, Ontario, Canada."
 * b) of its organizing and outreach service: "The Outreach & Organizing team provides information, referrals, workshops, and outreach & organizing services for tenants in the City of Toronto."
 * c) of its tenant education project: "FMTA Services are funded by the City of Toronto" and its workshops are all in Toronto
 * d) it's volunteer page says: "The FMTA relies on volunteers for almost all of the work that we do. There are several ways of volunteering that would really be helpful to us and to other tenants in Toronto." not Canada, Ontario or even the Greater Toronto Area but Toronto.
 * e) its "contact a politician" refers to "Toronto city councillor[s]" but not councillors from any other town or city and when it refers to provincial politicians it refers only to contacting Ontario politicians (the province Toronto is in) rather than those in any other part of Canada.
 * f) its message board is titled "Toronto Tenants Unite"
 * g) even the group's domain name is torontotenants.org, not a domain that would be chosen by a province wide or national group.
 * h) this source identifies the "areas served" by the FMTA as "Greater Toronto Area ; Markham" (Markham is the community on Toronto's northern border) rather than nation-wide.
 * There is no indication anywhere of any activity by the organization outside of the vicinity of Toronto so it fails the test that "The scope of their activities is national or international in scale". Your source, which is actually a snippet, doesn't actually identify any activity by the organization outside of Toronto's city limits which is why all the news sources are in Toronto where for a national or even regional organization one would have sources reporting on activity in a variety of towns and cities rather than just one. Clearly, the author of the book on Cold War espionage made a mistake, which isn't a surprise since the book is not primarily or even secondarily about the FMTA or tenants but about a completely unrelated topic and is by a British based author who is an expert on international and national security and intelligence issues, not by a Canadian or expert on tenant issues. It's like using a book about astronomy as a source for a fact related to plumbing. You say the FMTA has "members and chapters all across Canada" - name a single chapter outside of Toronto and show a source or, for that matter, name a single member from outside of Toronto. Jarvis Sherbourne (talk) 11:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * All of that original research is nice, but it doesn't mean much. You seem to be thinking that all of the chapters have the same name, when what happened is that they sprouted off from the main chapter. For example, the Federation of Ottawa-Carleton Tenants, made by Dan McIntyre, program coordinator for the Federation of Metro Tenants.
 * And as an example of my own original research, look here. If you notice where it lists the Federation of Metro Tenants, it says the location is Canada, not Ontario, Canada like it does for the group above. Silver  seren C 16:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You're speculating incorrectly. If you look closer you'll see a) The Federation of Ottawa-Carleton Tenant went under in 1998 and that b) Dan McIntyre joined the Federation of Metro Tenants after the Ottawa federation dissolved. which is the exact opposite of your speculation above c) there's no evidence that the Ottawa federation was ever a member of the Federation of Metro Tenants Associations.


 * Again, please show me any evidence that the FMTA has any chapters outside of Toronto. There's no indication of this on the FMTA's website. Do you see any websites of any non-Toronto tenant associations that say they are members of the FMTA? As for original research- that's only relevant for things being included in the article, it's completely valid when researching whether or not an organization passes the test of WP:NONPROFIT and the FMTA clearly does not. Jarvis Sherbourne (talk) 17:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

delete Only special interest groups here grasping at straws to keep this wikipedia advertisement of their organization up it seems. the criteria for non-profits is clearly not being met by this page. They are not a National or even provincial/state organization. Their membership numbers and accomplishments are in question and limited to the city of Toronto. Most of their claims can not be referenced by any reputable 3rd party source. The city of Toronto provides most of their funding. I nominate this page for deletion, barring any new evidence that this group has chapters or has offshoot organizations outside the Province of Ontario. The now non existent Ottawa Carlton association is the only loosely associated group i can think of and was only linked by the fact Dan McIntrye was a part of both, no formal integration has ever been made public.*** — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uproar k (talk • contribs) 20:34, 11 April 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.