Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Association of Young Geographers


 * 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. The sourcing seems to be on the edge of meeting WP:GNG, so naturally people disagree which way it should go. No prejudice to renomination should sourcing not improve in the future. ansh 666 19:28, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

International Association of Young Geographers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet Wikipedia notability guidelines RainWizard29422 (talk) 03:20, 13 February 2018 (UTC) This article covers an International Association of Young Geographers that may possibly operate in multiple countries around the world, yet provides no sufficient references besides that of the organization's website. The article shows bias towards the organization, indicating that it may be written by an involved member of the organization. For example, there is no source proving that its magazine Dimensions is the "the world's first peer-reviewed academic journal for undergraduate students in geography." Looking at the references, all sources point to either the website of the IAYG, or the NAYG, its North American sub-organization. One link about the Philippine Geography Olympiad is simply an advertisement for a preexisting competition that has lasted for eight years. Additional sources include a Facebook post made by the organization itself. There is simply no evidence in a reputable source that this organization is a "major global nonprofit." Additionally, it's creation of groups in Nigeria and Liberia have no online mention besides a page on IAYG's website. None of the proclaimed achievements can be corroborated by any reputable news source. While the efforts of the high school student aiming to promote geography literacy are commendable, the organization does not meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines(See WP:GNG) While this is a deletion page, perhaps other alternatives can be considered such as establishing this article as start class. RainWizard29422 (talk) 06:22, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. I hate to recommend a delete for this type of article, but I can barely find any additional non-primary sources regarding this organization to show notability. SportingFlyer (talk) 16:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Out of full disclosure, I am a professor affiliated with the IAYG in Canada, so I definitely am not a neutral arbiter. However, I just wanted to add a few comments regarding this IAYG that may provide more context. While I'm writing with no official connection to the IAYG, I think my 6,000 colleagues in the organization (the vast majority professors, educators, etc.) would agree with the comments below! To begin, I do not believe that any of the authors of the article are affiliated or part of the IAYG anymore. Even after review & edits by two administrators, the article is not currently flagged for NPOV. That said, as a relatively new page, there is much room for improvement: quotes that have been directly lifted from the IAYG website should be removed based on WP:NPOV, in my opinion.


 * Notability is clearly established, especially when keeping organizations like the European Geography Association for students and young geographers in mind that also have Wikipedia pages (albeit also imperfect - like this page, the citations need to be broadened). The organization's work is built on that of a few predecessors, including some that have worked for 60+ years, and as a large global organization, its impact is clear. The Philippine Geography Olympiad, for example, is a program by one of the IAYG University Society System's local branches, not a random advertisement: it is instead an example of the work of IAYG University Societies across the world, and the length and visibility of the competition is a testament to the society's importance and the contribution of students in the IAYG's Society System. One of the reasons why non-primary sources on the IAYG may be difficult to find is because the IAYG is often organized at local and regional levels - finding individual societies or the programs of each society is much easier. For example, the National Association of Geography Students, Nigeria is the official university student branch of the IAYG in Nigeria - and while it may be harder to find primary sources detailing IAYG Nigeria, it should not be difficult to find primary sources about the National Association of Geography Students, Nigeria, which is a subsidiary of the IAYG. Admittedly, however, as an organization whose work is largely based in the Developing World - including some of the world's nations with lowest media coverage, it is often difficult to find sources about the organization's work because of the significantly decreased level of media & external exposure (associations in the developing world, like the Nigerian Association of Mathematical Physics often are very limited with few external references due to these natural limitations). In fairness, we need to keep that in mind when evaluating external sources.


 * Furthermore, as you can you can see on the website (www.younggeographers.org) and on websites like the official website of the IGU YECG, the IAYG has partners and local affiliates all across the world, as a highly visible, connected, and notable organization in the field of geography. Vis-a-vis the Global Geography Curriculum Development Programme, you will notice that governments from around the world have established partnerships with the IAYG - a marker of its impact and global respect within educational institutions. In the sources, you will also notice that the IAYG has a partnership with IGU institutions, also reflecting its status and notability.


 * I think the best recourse would be to look to the page's improvement. While I do not believe I should add any content because of a potential conflict of interest, I am happy to add pictures that will help corroborate the article's information about the IAYG's work around the world (including the developments in Liberia and Nigeria that RainWizard mentions). Looking through RainWizard's history, I am also concerned that it could be a personal matter, as User:EmperorNapoléonI spearheaded the deletion of one of RainWizard's pages about a middle school. While this may not be the case, and I sincerely hope that RainWizard is acting in good faith as a trustee of our shared resource, I do hope that personal clashes will not get in the way of a justifiable page for a large and notable organization - one that has already been reviewed by respected admins, and deserving of WP:Notability standards. Isaac Iorazev (talk) 15:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Only issue is the article needs to pass WP:ORGSIG. An organization doesn't have inherent notability, and while I appreciate your suggestions to improve the article, that doesn't change whether it's notable for Wikipedia, and I can't find anything that makes me recommend anything other than delete, and I don't want to recommend a delete. Your Nigerian Mathematical Physics article at least has multiple instances of coverage from a newspaper. The GGCDP website appears to be a branch of the organization. For instance, if you could find any source from a non-organizational websites showing a working relationship with another institution, I'd recommend something other than delete. SportingFlyer (talk) 17:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi SportingFlyer, thanks for the note. I'm completely in agreement. I spoke with IAYG NorthAm Global Communications officials earlier today (people more important than me!), and they told me that the IAYG carefully controls & monitors a lot of information that details the IAYG's working relationships with other institutions, which is why it can be difficult to find. For example, due to the nature of the IAYG's work, most documents are not normally disclosed to the public. However, I was able to receive permission to share access to some official documents (including those on non-IAYG/non-organization websites) with you for the purposes of corroboration, which will prove the IAYG's deep working relationships with other institutions. If it works for you, please email prof-edmonton@younggeographers.org (the email address for our local group) so I can share the access codes with you. Hopefully, this will resolve the issue! Iorazev (talk) 22:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Official documents from the organization won't show notability, unfortunately, nor will referencing documents behind access codes. See WP:ORGIND. Again, I am struggling to find any independent sources online, and the ones that could be arguably independent focus on the founder. Would there be anything in any geographical journals? Any work done with say the AAG? SportingFlyer (talk) 06:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep and improve - the subject meets WP:Notability criteria, but the page definitely should be improved with more sources and external information, as all new pages should. Pages like these, that detail subjects which meet Notability standards, shouldn't be deleted but continually improved, especially so early in its life. I think someone ought to put a Refimprove tag on it to attract attention of editors. JimNemcovic (talk) 16:31, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

*Comment - Considering User:Iorazev's statements, this is what I have to say: Hello Iorazev, I read through your comments on the articles for deletion page for the International Association of Young Geographers. Many of your points are well articulated, such as the fact that lesser developing countries will not have enough coverage. Emperor Napoleon did delete my middle school article, but the only reason I am advocating for a delete is because, on similar premises to my own article that was deleted, the article contains no other sources besides links to its own website. While the IAYG website indicates it has formed geography associations in countries like Ghana and Nigeria, there is simply no further information besides a single page on the website about each of them. Even if news coverage is less in LDCs, there should at least by some online record of NGO or the governments mentioned on the IAYG website that they are collaborating with the IAYG. For example, I see the official seals of South Sudan, Nigeria, and Swaziland, but no official reciprocation on any of the government's websites. Also, you mentioned the Association taking charge of the Philippine Geography Olympiad. The post on the website is simply a flyer advocating registration. The competition itself has been running for eight years, longer than the IAYG, which was founded in 2017. This Filipino Government Website mentions the competition and the fact that it is hosted by a local university, but no mention of the fact that the IAYG coordinates it. (http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/advisory/2018/DA_s2018_002.pdf) Pictures would be appreciated as proof of the IAYG's activities, however, a few gatherings of members may not be sufficient enough to justify. I am willing to withdraw my deletion motion if IAYG can post some sort of Press Release with more elaborate statistics of their activities, which indicated corroboration from a more legitimate source. Again, the organization is commendable in its aims, and geography education should become a greater priority in society, however, at this time the organization is not notable enough for Wikipedia. RainWizard29422 (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I want to correct a few points, because I believe RainWizard has a number of misconceptions of the IAYG that I as an affiliated individual can help dispel. To begin, while the modern branding of the IAYG is a recent development (the name was formally changed to the IAYG in January 2015 - not 2017 - and the U.S. branch to the NAYG in June 2016 to reflect a unified branding), and the growth of the organization into an influential institution has occurred largely in the last 6-7 years, the IAYG is built on a foundation of decades of work in geographic education. In fact, of the IAYG's predecessors, the first were established in the early 1960s! I think you have also misunderstood the nature of the Philippine Geography Olympiad. The IAYG's University Society System also includes branches all over the world, including the Geographic Society of the University of the Philippines, which is the IAYG University Society System's largest branch in the Philippines. The Philippine Geography Olympiad is a program of this branch, and the competition has indeed ran for 8+ years. As the Geographical Society of the University of the Philippines is a branch of the IAYG University Society System, it is an example of the work & coverage surrounding one of the IAYG's University Society System branches - and because it is a branch-led program, the branch's name is most prominent. This is actually a really good example of media coverage surrounding IAYG University Society System events, with mentions even on the Philippine government's website, like you said. As I noted before, one of the challenges with the IAYG's media presence is that to find more extensive sources, you have to research each of the IAYG's local and regional components.


 * I would highly encourage you to corroborate your claims with the true information about the IAYG, and I'm sure the great folks in Global Communications would be more than happy to tell you all about each of these events. As I noted earlier, I talked to Global Communications North America, who told me that they are happy to detail history, information, and citations about the organization and its local components. According to them, if anyone has specific questions or would like a more exhaustive review, they are asked to email the Global Directorate at contact@younggeographers.org, which will respond with all the necessary documentation and information as necessary. I'm proud to be part of a very transparent organization and will also help in any way I can, so please copy prof-edmonton@younggeographers.org if I can help as well :) Iorazev (talk) 22:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment I wrote this article, so obviously I should not comment on its inclusion or deletion. However, while there is much room for improvement (new articles typically need additional sources, etc.) I think it meets standards prescribed in WP:ORGSIG given the coverage of IAYG-sponsored events & local organizations in media. Information about the IAYG and documents demonstrating the relationships with governments and other respected institutions also attest to ORGSIG standards (I reached out to you, Iorazev for documentation). Also, this page was just reviewed & approved by admin Graeme Bartlett last week, and I do not think anything has changed since then (other than a case of vandalism) that would merit any change in status. That said, I care about the quality of articles I write, and will do my best to add more references and sources, improving it as any would. Adding to Iorazev's comment, I want to also remind RainWizard to consider this case objectively, as this account was involved in the deletion of a page relating to a middle school that RainWizard created and strenuously objected to. I trust that he is acting in WP:Good Faith, but it always important to be cognizant of particular choices taken. Best regards EmperorNapoléonI (talk) 00:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hi EmperorNapoléon, the page has been up only since the start of the month and I don't see a talk page nor do I see a review & approve - but a review & approve by one editor doesn't change the fact the article has never passed WP:N. I have no reason to believe this isn't a good faith deletion request: even assuming it was made with malicious intent, the organization needs independent media sources to be notable. I can't find any after several online searches and no one here has provided them. I will happily change my vote to keep if significant independent coverage of the organizaton exists as I appreciate what the organization is trying to do. SportingFlyer (talk) 06:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment I believe that User:Iorazev has some misconception of the founding of the NAYG/IAYG. The NAYG was founded by Phillip Meng in summer of 2016. Social media posts by Rishi Nair, one of the top members in the organization, corroborate this evidence. https://plus.google.com/u/1/+RishiNfl/posts/ZRJXnNzho43?cfem=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by RainWizard29422 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * RainWizard29422, as a member of this organization, I believe that you are incorrect about the history of the IAYG. You are correctly referring to the unified rebranding and renaming of our organization, which was done internationally in 2015 and in the United States in 2016, and was celebrated as a "new start" especially since it marked the launch of many endeavors in the United States and pan-American activities for the first time (I should note that NAYG and IAYG websites were not connected until 2017, which may also be the source of your confusion). However, before the rebranding, the organization had operated for many years, hence why so many of its programs have been running for a long time. Furthermore, Rishi Nair is no longer a student representative of the NAYG. Alas, neither of us are definitive resources, so I beseech you to speak with IAYG Global Communications, who I am sure would be pleased to help correct your misconceptions. Iorazev (talk) 15:12, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment To whoever is an administrator on Wikipedia, isn't it against the etiquette of Wikipedia for members of an organization itself to added substantial comments in the discussion of this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RainWizard29422 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not an administrator, but they haven't voted on whether or not to keep or delete the article, they've been forthright with the conflict of interest, and they're in a good position to show whether this qualifies for WP:N as they may have access to sources that show notability I don't have easy access to (such as journal articles). Nothing of concern on my end. Please try and stay on topic as to whether the article meets WP:N. SportingFlyer (talk) 20:44, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete as per RainWizard. Very few secondary sources (if at all?) that mention this organization with a quick Google search. smileguy91talk - contribs 06:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Iorazev's contributions are a little bit suspicious. Per WP:SOCK and looking at WP:SOSP, and the fact that Iorazev's account seems to have been created solely for the purpose of arguing against the deletion of this article...I don't want to accuse directly but this is either a bewildering coincidence or concerning behavior. smileguy91talk - contribs 06:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Hi smileguy91, you're not wrong! As I stated earlier, I am affiliated with the IAYG, and created this account to help present additional information and context that might help with this discussion (in academic organizations, sometimes you have to dig deeper to find corroborating sources, after all). I think I've been very honest about this conflict of interest, and it is why I have not voted on this issue and have only added comments. I'm not sure what the protocol is but I think that's within the bounds of Wikipedia rules. In that spirit, I also want to ask about your connection with RainWizard29422 and comment on a matter. This morning, we received a public memorandum (it's been posted at http://www.nayg.org/memoranda/m0216/) on this issue. I'm curious to know how WP:COI applies to cases like these. Iorazev (talk) 18:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Sorry, I probably need to clarify that I meant a sock of the creator of the article. I also really appreciate your disclosure about your connections to IAYG, and your resolve to not vote on this issue. That is commendable, and I appreciate your effort to abide by Wikipedia rules in this sense. I only intend to call one thing into question for the consideration of whoever participates in this discussion, and I want to emphasize that my delete vote ONLY has to do with the lack of notability of the article due to vaguely related (if related at all) sources, and not this. This account's ONLY contributions to Wikipedia are somehow related to this discussion, which is fairly consistent with WP:SIGNS of socking (which is against Wikipedia policy) by the creator of the article; however, correlation is NOT necessarily causation. Also, the memorandum you mentioned on the IAYG's website seems to have been written significantly after the creation of this AfD notice, and quite possibly (considering the 18:11 UTC timestamp of your above message, which is approximately 11:11 in Edmonton, Alberta) specifically written in response to this article. I don't see a plausible reason why the writer of the memorandum would write it on the 16th instead of the 14th, when this discussion was first commented on by you, who appears to be the same person as the person who wrote the memorandum or at least triggered its writing. smileguy91talk - contribs 04:59, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * smileguy91, I am not a sock puppet of EmperorNapoleon. That said, our answers and this memorandum are linked because we began coordinating with the IAYG's Global Communications team after the Deletion motion was filed. This is one of the reasons why I have chosen not to vote; I understand that I am an organization representative in a sense of the word, and my only role is to present information from the perspective of our organization to provide a fair and balanced debate, and assist in sourcing claims and addressing incorrect claims based on the best of my knowledge. I do not believe that organization representatives can be banned from this debate, though if there is such documentation, I will not participate. I appreciate, however, your vigilance in considering who participates in this discussion, which is why I asked whether you have any personal connections to RainWizard. With the concerns in the memo in mind, I curious as to why RainWizard specifically called on you to join this discussion. Iorazev (talk) 05:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Comment For some reason, Iorazev posted several sources on my own talk page here: User talk:SportingFlyer/Archive 1 I don't know how I got dragged so far into this discussion, but I have concerns about these sources. (Also, if we could incorporate that as part of this AfD, that would probably be beneficial.)
 * demoprep.us: independent, but possibly not significant - only a blurb, and written in marketing speak
 * brown.edu: not an article about the organization, but rather an article about a person
 * nags.futminna.edu.ng: an article created by the organization
 * deped.gov.ph: contains literally no mention about the organization, much less notable content
 * again, the Kenyatta University GIS Club map again contains no mention of the organization
 * The Laval University event only contains a passing mention of the organization as a sponsor.
 * I would expect there to be many more mentions if the organization were a notable stakeholder in these types of events; stakeholders almost always want to advertise their involvement with an event. It's clear the organization exists, but I'm still not seeing notability here. Plus the organization issued a memoranda on this AfD. This whole thing is pretty strange. SportingFlyer (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Comment Currently, there are three votes(including mine) for delete and only one in favor. Haven't we reached our majority User:SportingFlyer? RainWizard29422 (talk) 19:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment My apologies, I meant to post the sources here in response to one of your previous comments. I'm not sure where it actually ended up; I can remove the section if preferred. I'll continue to add articles based on what I find. Iorazev (talk) 19:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NOTVOTE. I'd also like to note to the closer my concern regarding the neutrality of this comment by the nominator, and the fact the nominator specifically canvassed Smileguy91 and MatthewVanitas (and only these two users) on their talk page regarding this article. SportingFlyer (talk) 07:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment  To both RainWizard29422 and Iorazev: as per SportingFlyer, please stay on the topic of how this article is WP:N or not. I understand that there is some kind of history between users in this discussion, but discussion about some previous disagreement (or just anything not directly related to this discussion) will just lead to WP:UNCIVIL and that's not good. smileguy91talk - contribs 05:08, 17 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment List of sources - as SportingFlyer said, I accidentally posted these somewhere else, so here is a running list of some non-primary sources I found:
 * *http://www.demoprep.us/2017/07/27/demoprepiayg/ This is an example of the IAYG's relationship with a local foundation. This is a relatively large program (I think), and is definitely an independent source.
 * *http://watson.brown.edu/HI2/people/international-fellows/kayode This is an example of an IAYG official invited to a humanitarian board. I'm not sure if this is relevant, but I thought I should put this here since I found it. (new to the rules. Sorry, everyone.)
 * *http://www.deped.gov.ph/advisories/da-002-s-2018 and https://kuniversity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=416eb26c74434d40ae0e1e0a90963a51. These are both events organized by branches of the IAYG University Society System. Unfortunately, I don't think the IAYG is mentioned in either - only the branch name is. Internal documents and primary sources will affirm that these are University Society System branches, however.
 * *http://igu2018.ulaval.ca/assets/documents/Invitation%20IGU-YECG%20Networking%20Event.pdf An example of both the IAYG's close partnership with another major organization (IGU-YECG) and an event that the IAYG is supporting. Independent source, evidence of geographic span of work.


 * I will keep looking for sources. Sadly, more official documents are often not for public access, though you can contact me if you are interested in access (just if you want to see them in person; I know that Wikipedia does not accept them)


 * I know that this list isn't perfect, but over time, I am sure that much more will be added. As I have said before, press coverage in IAYG working regions can be elusive due to the small media presence, and perhaps patience is warranted. After all, the article has really only been touched by one editor, and the IAYG has already authorized a call for media release in selected communities starting at the beginning of the next business week. It should be clear that the IAYG works around the world, and in light of so many new Wikipedia articles with barely any non-primary sources, it may not make sense to hold this article to a different standard, especially as we examine the rationale behind this AfD request. As I have said profusely, I am not neutral and am part of the IAYG, this account was created so that I could add context and sources to make the discussion more fair and balanced, and because of that I have not voted and have no right to make this decision (if it does say in the rules that someone connected to an organization cannot comment on its AfD discussion, I will leave this discussion too), but these are just my personal beliefs. Iorazev (talk) 08:19, 17 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hey RainWizard24922:
 * Dude, are you still going forward with this? Those of us in the GBC group already told you that you're just doing this to get back at the President of the IAYG, and that its not done in good faith. You know that the organization works around the world and that you're holding it to a ridiculous standard, just like we told you. I can see that you're talking about being neutral, but you called the NAYG (the IAYG's US branch) a "threat" to your community, compared the leader to alexander Lukashenko, and was part of a group temporarily called "NAYG is a Fraud! Down with [the President of the IAYG]"! Also, you offered essentially a deal whereby the IAYG could "broadcast [their] message" on your forum in exchange for not having IAYG representatives respond about conflicts of interest and false information. Is that even allowed? (also I am familiar with the organization so out of potential conflict of interest I'm not going to vote) Rishi09123 (talk) 20:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Keep for now, but reopen discussion at a later time I am the original creator of this discussion, but considering that no consensus has been made on this article, I'm afraid we just have to let this article be for the moment. While no substantial sources exist, we can give it a period of a few months for improvement. The online sources provided by User:Iorazev do establish contact between the International Association and a few professors and organizations, this article should be designated as Start-Class. If no reasonable evidence can prove the notability of the article in the future, we can reconsider deletion. User:smileguy91, User:SportingFlyer what do you think of this? RainWizard29422 (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Why are only those who have voted with you consulted in this? I echo SportingFlyer's question about neutrality. I agree with keep: I hate to see an article like this go and there is enough out there for GNG. The organization definitely exists, has reach, and claims are backed up with a few secondary sources (needs more, though not much different from others). Most AfC go under much less scrutiny than this article here, too. There are a couple of unsubstantiated passages that should be removed, but that does not impact general value. JimNemcovic (talk) 09:38, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Keep and improve The subject appears to meet General Notability but article is not great and should have more secondary sources added. If Rishi09123's claims are true (they are similar to memo, first time I have ever seen a memo on Wikipedia), this is a very serious issue indeed. The user RainWizard seems to not work from a neutral perspective and has canvassed particular users (including in that last comment) which is also questionable. If this AfD is out of malicious intent, that would be against principle of good faith. Lagrime (talk) 07:04, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Comment JimNemcovic and Lagrime, I appreciate your concerns about neutrality. Your comments are written out of pure interest of Wikipedia, which is well appreciated. However, I'd late to state some concerns and make some clarifications of my own. Reading the comments of users far more experienced than I am, I reconsidered my position from delete to 'Keep for Now.' Also, in my last comment I tagged only the voters who supported deletion because I wanted to see their take on my change in position from delete to keep. If I could, I would withdraw the deletion process altogether, but Wikipedia guidelines say do not remove until a consensus is released. Simply contacting SportingFlyer and SmileGuy91 was simply to engage a dialogue that would reach this consensus. As I tagged them here and not on their talk pages, I wanted them to provide a new perspective in light of what has been brought up some of the other comments. As restated before, we should rate this article as Start-Class. On the other hand, I am concerned that I am being targeted by members of the organization. The memo is exaggerated, calling a Google+ group found at (tinyurl.com/geobeecity) as a virulent Anti-NAYG group. Furthermore, I have been receiving unwanted text messages from members of the organization. I do not wish to take any action on these, and I feel that IAYG people like User:Iorazev have brought up quite valuable points. I guess considering the fact that User:EmperorNapoleonI led a deletion campaign for John Adams Middle School would be a source of conflict of interest, as well as any prior interaction between the blog site and NAYG//IAYG. I therefore wish to apologize for any inconveniences as I am still a novice as the Articles for Deletion process and did not know about the whole conflict of interest issue. I feel that since the process is already started, changing my position to Keep and Improve is the only thing I can do at the moment. I do not doubt that the organization exists, but once again I see that many of the organization's descriptions have few sources other than the website itself. Designating the article as Start-Class would be a more optimal choice considering we could let Wikipedians know that this is an article that needs work. Hopefully, as the organization becomes more established as a major geographic authority, we can find more sources to back up its key points. Respectfully, RainWizard29422 (talk) 04:06, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * RainWizard29422, thank you for addressing some of these points. I am not very familiar with the conflict in question, though it is clear as SmileGuy said that there is some history here that may need to be uncovered. I am always wary of looking into these cases for fear of WP:UNCIVIL but ultimately closer will decide so full picture is needed. The important question is whether Rishi09123's claims are true. Are the claims that you "called the NAYG a "threat" to your community, compared the leader to alexander Lukashenko, and was part of a group temporarily called "NAYG is a Fraud! Down with [the President of the IAYG]" really true? And did you offer a "deal" so that the organization-related people would not respond? I don't know what rules specifically apply but that would put WP:Neutrality into question. Like SportingFlyer I also have concerns about your comment on voting. It is possible that it could be a rules misunderstanding but we need context. We will assume good faith and definitely do not want to level accusations at RainWizard without proof (after all there is no proof for claims right now) but if any are true, this would be very serious. Lagrime (talk) 05:45, 19 February 2018 (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.