Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King's Kids International


 * 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   delete. NW ( Talk ) 19:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

King's Kids International
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is about a non-profit organization that does not meet notability. The article was created from primary sources. Looking for third-party coverage about the organization shows some event listings and this article where they are mentioned as one of several organisers of a conference. However, there does not appear to be any coverage about the organization itself. It has been tagged for notability since Feb 2009 and for primary sources since Mar 2009 with no improvement. Whpq (talk) 13:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Racepacket (talk) 13:06, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. DustyRain (talk) 18:55, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Well pointed out. --WngLdr34 (talk) 19:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 *  Keep & Expand  (A) It is a stub. (B) It is notable, because it is notable guidelines it says that an organization has to have a national scope or greater to be notable for a organization.--Robert Scheurwater 08:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - That's an incomplete view of the guidelines for organisations. The lead in to the criteria states "Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards" (emphasis added). -- Whpq (talk) 10:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Response - Hey, I have found third party references for you :D. I have added one so far, so the article can stay open, because I am rebuilding / editing the article, because it looks like a mess. --Robert Scheurwater (User Page|Talk) 19:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - He everyone I changed my mind I am not going to be the only one fighting for it.
 * Comment - It's helpful to strike your original !vote when you change your mind. I've done that for you.  I've also reviewed the one reference you added and it hardly counts as significant coverage. -- Whpq (talk) 11:13, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Response - Thx I dont know the tag for the strike through. --Robert Scheurwater (User Page|Talk) 15:24, 27 September 2009 (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.