Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Immigration Watch Canada (2nd 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 keep. (non-admin closure) — Yashtalk stalk 00:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Immigration Watch Canada
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Subject is lacking in-depth coverage in reliable secondary sources, as required by notability criteria. Coverage seems to revolve around one news event in 2015 that was apparently inconsequential. Article created by single-purpose account with possible conflict of interest. Citobun (talk) 05:29, 30 January 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, joe deckertalk 05:50, 7 February 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:07, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The nomination statement that "coverage seems to revolve around one news event in 2015" doesn't seem to be correct. Gnews reveals enough coverage in reliable sources, on more than one incident -- and in various provinces, too. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * As for the claim of COI: whatever motives User:HardRightTurn might have had in creating this stub article, I'm pleased to see that it is in no way a puff piece for this group. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:03, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Since the last nomination, there was another incident, disavowed by IWC in Edmonton. Also not covered is another 2014 incident in York. . The actions of IWC have gotten mention in the context of racism in Canada as far abroad as the Asia Times: .  Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:21, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - This organisation is mentioned in various reliable sources as representing anti-immigrant groups. The Huffington Post Canada has articles on three incidents in which it has been involved and its views and actions are quoted in several other sources such as this. I think it meets WP:ORG. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:08, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:ORG. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:13, 21 February 2017 (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.