Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ferguson October


 * 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   no consensus. Of note is that the article has been renamed to Ferguson Action. NorthAmerica1000 22:55, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Ferguson October

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not actually appear to be an group of any kind. Of the sources used that mention "Ferguson October" all of them refer to it as an event, not a movement or group. All of them refer to it also as just part of the larger ongoing protests about the shooting. Redirect to one of the relevant articles. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. - MrX 16:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. - MrX 16:20, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - Hmmmm.... I don't know. At first glance I'm seeing a couple mid to high quality RS (e.g., ) that do give it direct coverage and actually call it a movement. Maybe what we want here is a rename/move/merge rather than a delete? NickCT (talk) 16:23, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I would completely support a merge into one of the articles about the shooting itself, Ferguson unrest or a hypothetical Reactions to the shooting of Michael Brown Gaijin42 (talk) 17:29, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. postdlf (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: How is this related to firearms?--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 21:46, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It's been removed from the delsort page, so I took the note out. Cheers, ansh666 20:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep article meets WP:GNG criteria. Needs expansion, not deletion. Hmlarson (talk) 05:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename to 2014 civil rights protests in the United States. Clearly meets WP:GNG, we need a parent article for all of these ongoing events, I would recommend a re-name though. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:06, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * How would this differ from 2014 Ferguson unrest? --Guy Macon (talk) 03:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * These are nationwide protests over two different events, it has gone beyond Ferguson and now includes Eric Garner. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:35, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect to 2014 Ferguson unrest. This is part of a larger series of events. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect to 2014 Ferguson unrest for me as well. --IJBall (talk) 18:56, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep and rename I agree with the idea of renaming it to 2014 Civil Rights Protests in the United States. I further agree that it meets WP:GNG. It certainly falls outside the scope of the unrest in Ferguson. Icarosaurvus (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Another non-notable "organization" that has sprung up in the wake of the Shooting of Michael Brown. These groups (and I use the term generously) get a little incidental coverage because Fergusen and other protest areas are swarming with reporters looking for a story and someone to quote. Also see Hands Up United, also up for deletion. A few others exist, but as far as I know, no one has made articles for them... yet. At best, merge all these sundry names into a section of 2014 Ferguson unrest. If any of them ever become notable in their own right after this event dies down, then they can be revisited. – JBarta (talk) 09:16, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Same--98.167.190.29 (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article is about an organized social movement, not a group, thus the applicable notability guideline is WP:GNG. Several major media sources have reported specifically about the movement in non-trival coverage including Huffington Post, ABC News, Washington Post, LA Times, USA Today, MSNBC, Essence Magazine, The New Yorker, Fox News, International Business Times, and Newsweek. I'm gobsmacked that this article was nominated for AfD as it shows a startling disregard for WP:BEFORE. Editors commenting that the article should be renamed to 2014 Civil Rights Protests in the United States should understand that these are related, but completely different subjects, much in the way that Kent State shootings is different than Protests against the Vietnam War. This subject easily stands on it's own as meriting an independent article, per WP:SIGCOV.- MrX 02:01, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * In this context, the difference between a "group" and an "organized social movement" is paper thin. Here are two sources(1,2) referring to it as a group. Surely you could reply with sources calling it a movement. That's the point... group, organization, social movement, action committee or whatever, this is one of many entities that have sprung up since the protest started and all are clamoring to be heard. Most (if not all) have received some level of coverage in the news simply because this is a currently hot story. Does that make them all notable? Is this one more notable than the others? – JBarta (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Even if it were a group, which it's not, it would still be notable by a country mile. Notability is determined by coverage in reliable sources, which Ferguson October has had, in abundance.- MrX 04:21, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Notability is also tempered by WP:NTEMP... "brief bursts of news coverage may not be sufficient signs of notability" – JBarta (talk) 04:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The world has now seen 4+ months of consistent coverage. Is that considered brief in your opinion? Interesting, if so. Hmlarson (talk) 19:43, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I would agree that several groups have been making it into the news since this all started and in the context of everything above, yes it's brief. A better solution is a section in the unrest article describing this flurry of groups and what their statements, activities and demands are (which shouldn't take too long because they're all pretty much the same) mention a few of the more notable ones by name including some of the activities they took part in or organized. That way all these groups can get mentioned in Wikipedia without creating a separate article for each. – JBarta (talk) 20:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Keep* but rename (and kind of repurpose) to 2014 civil rights protests in the United States. Also support redirecting to 2014 Ferguson Unrest but not as much as the former. It seems like the Ferguson October thing will also connect to the more recent deaths and there probably should be a place to gather all of it (and the Ferguson article is getting to be longer and longer, maybe relevant parts should fork and become a separate article). &mdash; kikichugirl  inquire 09:07, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tawker (talk) 03:45, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The article meets GNB although Ferguson action seems like a social movement rather than a organized group considering the sources like 1, 2 and 3. So, the title would better change to sth else showing this difference. Mhhossein (talk) 07:01, 12 December 2014 (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.