Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jer's Vision1


 * 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 to delete, default to keep.  Jauerbackdude?/dude. 21:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Jer&

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The article needs a lot of help to be neutral, and was created by the orgnization itself thus it is also spam. It really doesn't have a place on Wikipedia, and fails to cite sources. Let's delete it. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * DeleteThey've had quite a bit of time to reinforce the notability and neutrality of the article, add sources, etc., and it seems like the maintainers have been unready or unwilling to do so. RayAYang (talk) 05:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I was able to uncover a number of mentions of the charity or the author 1 2 3 4 5. I agree it would have been nice to have seen those used in the article already. justinfr (talk) 11:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * These appear mostly to be about the originator, not his organization, with the exception of the first one. He may well be notable (although the usual caveat about WP:ONEEVENT may apply. I don't view these references, most of which don't mention his organization, as giving sufficient cause of notability. RayAYang (talk) 00:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I actually had the same thought when going through them, that the founder might be more notable than the organization. I don't feel especially strongly either way here. justinfr (talk) 03:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  IRK! Leave me a note or two 22:44, 16 July 2008 (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.