Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hands Up United


 * 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. I am taking the action as an ordinary editor (and explicitly not as admin or closer) to redirect this article to 2014 Ferguson unrest. Stifle (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Hands Up United

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable WP:ORG. Has passing mentions in references as part of the larger notable protests, but no sources discussing the organization itself in any detail. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Newsweek, The Atlantic, The Guardian and Wash. Post coverage is all passing; three of these simply mention it to identify the person being quoted. — Brianhe (talk) 00:32, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep article clearly meets WP:GNG criteria and WP:ORG. Article needs expansion, not deletion. Hmlarson (talk) 05:24, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. - MrX 16:14, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. - MrX 16:19, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 4 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - It's just not notable. Agree with nom and Brianhe. Per WP:ORG "Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability." Hmlarson says the article just needs expansion. Well, there's nothing really to expand. It doesn't look like they've done anything beyond making some noise and putting up a hollow (but pretty) web site. Maybe one day they will become notable... but not today. – JBarta (talk) 07:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I will say this... when I google "hands up", handsupunited.org is the first hit. I suppose that's something. Not a lot... but something.... – JBarta (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: Google News yields 435 results including these articles from WSJ,Fox News Democracy Now The New York Times, Washington Post, and hundreds more. Hmlarson (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Mentioned in passing, usually along with other "organizations" that may or may not be notable. Will they still get even incidental mentioning when reporters looking for any story leave Fergusen? Probably not. – JBarta (talk) 23:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to 2014 Ferguson unrest. Thus far at least, they're only involved in these particular events and mentioned in passing in relation to them. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 21:59, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Hmlarson (talk) 01:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Ferguson October, part of a larger event. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:03, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Please note that Ferguson October is itself up for deletion. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:59, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect to 2014 Ferguson unrest. This is part of a larger series of events. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:59, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah but not all of the unrest is happening in Ferguson anymore. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:33, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Meets WP:GNG, and WP:ORGDEPTH which states that "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability." The following sources qualify under this criteria (they are not trivial or incidental): CBS News, Huffington Post, Fox News, Tech Cocktail, USA Today, and Jewish Daily Forward.- MrX 02:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - Also see Articles for deletion/Ferguson October, a similar article also up for deletion. – JBarta (talk) 21:42, 7 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.