Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Christian Medical and Dental Association (3rd 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 no consensus‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. North America1000 10:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

International Christian Medical and Dental Association
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NCORP. No WP:SIGCOV found on a WP:BEFORE. Only sources listed are the company's website. ~WikiOriginal-9~ ( talk ) 08:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting. Although participants here argue to Keep this article, we need some independent, secondary sources supplying SIGCOV to verify at least some information in this article. That's the standard for all article subjects, even the most worthy organizations. Otherwise, this Wikipedia article is just an extension of the company's website. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Christianity. CptViraj (talk) 08:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and England.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  11:50, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep -- This is international umbrella organisation for organisations such as Christian Medical Fellowship (UK - membership over 5000) and Christian Medical and Dental Associations (US - membership 19000). Information on such associations is usually difficult to collect other than from their own website and publications, but does not mean that they are NN.  It may well be that the 107 members are in fact 107 national fellowships.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Google scholar link above shows plenty of coverage in various publications, often in the context of international medical missions performed under the auspices of the group. News shows plenty of independent sources, one as far back as 2013 if enduring coverage were a concern. I'm puzzled that all this was missed in a BEFORE, as there certainly exist independent RS sufficient to improve the admittedly stubbish article. Jclemens (talk) 20:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Those news sources are passing mentions. ~WikiOriginal-9~  ( talk ) 21:25, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Further comment -- The question should be "Is it notable?" (I say YES) and "Is there a potential redirect target?", to which I would answer that there is not. In response to the relisting comment, I would suggest that even passing references may verify the truth of a website.  It there is nothing else, a brief description with a link to the website should probably be acceptable, in this case listing national member organisations for which WP has articles (and are presumably notable).  This makes it more than a mere extension of the organisation's website.  It may technically be a company, but is in essence a membership association.  Peterkingiron (talk) 12:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.