Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hunt of a Lifetime


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Sam Sailor Talk! 09:40, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Hunt of a Lifetime

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable organisation, Google search produces no good reliable sources. Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:08, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment What is unreliable about this Salon article?   General Ization   Talk   16:23, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Or this one, published in Sun Valley magazine?  General Ization  Talk   16:26, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Another here, at Lancaster Online. I'm not sure what kind of search you conducted, but you seem to have missed some reliable sources.  General Ization   Talk   16:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Keep Article in Field and Stream, February 2000. I think the claim that the organization is non-notable is easily disproven.  General Ization   Talk   16:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Still fails WP:GNG in my opinion. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:38, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please explain what aspect of GNG you feel is not fulfilled by the sources above. The mentions of the subject are non-trivial, and appear in reliable, independent sources. According to the 2015 Sun Valley article, the organization "has established organizations in all 50 states, four Canadian provinces, Africa and New Zealand."  Personally, I find the concept a bit bizarre (fulfilling a dying child's wish to kill animals), and the organization seems to have been somewhat less than forthcoming in terms of its public reporting as a charity, but we are to be objective in our application of the notability guidelines.  General Ization   Talk   17:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Another hit, this one a 2004 article by Lew Freedman for the Chicago Tribune.  General Ization   Talk   18:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless you are willing and able to answer the questions above, I would ask you to withdraw this AfD as speedy keep (reason #1), on the basis that the premise under which it was opened has now been determined to be false. There's no need to leave the AfD to work its way through the bureaucracy if the subject of the article can't be shown to be non-notable.  General Ization  Talk   21:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm on holiday, so can only give a quick response. 6 sources is not enough to definitely pass WP:GNG, and so I believe this discussion should continue. And currently only 1 other person actually agrees with you, which isn't a clear consensus to keep. Also, why did you feel the need to ping me 3 times about it, ? Joseph2302 (talk) 22:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I literally pinged you only once (as you can see); I presume you were pinged for each of the multiple edits I made to my comments above, the last two of which moved my comments (including the template) to a different line on the page.  The number of "keeps" matters not if the asserted basis for the AfD is invalid.  Even so, we'll let it run its course.  Enjoy your holiday.  General Ization   Talk   22:41, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I will point out, however, that GNG is pretty clear on this point: "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." I stopped only to avoid being tedious; there are many other published sources concerning this organization, if only one takes the time to look.  General Ization   Talk   22:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: Having done some more research, the organization itself is notable, so rather it is the article that needs more work done on it to bring it up-to standard. So I vote against deletion.--Aspro (talk) 18:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as I'm not finding any of this solidly convincing for the applicable notability and I have not noticed anything else convincing. SwisterTwister   talk  23:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Could you please explain why you don't think that the sources listed above and in the article are insufficient? You may well be right, but without addressing that issue your comment here is of no use in advancing this discussion towards consensus. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Please clarify, as your question contains what I think is a double-negative. Were you asking SwisterTwister why they thought the sources were insufficient (i.e., didn't think they were sufficient), or why I think they are sufficient?  General Ization   Talk   20:35, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I must have changed my mind about wording half way through adding my comment and not gone back to correct things. I meant this as a question to SwisterTwister about why he thinks the sources are insufficient. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:40, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  TT me 13:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep That any one would create an organisation to help people go out and kill something as a parting major act in life makes it fascinating for me and also hence a fundamentally notable comment on the human race and definitely deserves recording. Aoziwe (talk) 13:45, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

<div style="margin: auto 2em; border: 1px dashed #AAAAAA; padding: 4px; background-color: white; padding-left: 1em;"> References
 * Keep – The topic passes WP:ORGDEPTH. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. Many of these sources were easily found using the Find sources template atop this nomination. North America1000 17:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Salon
 * Lancaster Online
 * ABC News
 * Lancaster Online
 * The Victoria Advocate (via Associated Press)
 * Herald Journal
 * Field & Stream
 * The Argus-Press
 * SunValley magazine
 * Bangor Daily News (continued on p. B5, scroll right)
 * WAGM Television
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:20, 5 May 2016 (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.