Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LightHouse Ohio


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

LightHouse Ohio

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Business incubator for high school students founded by college students. Inherently this isn't an organization with large scope. (Remember, notability relates to the organization, not its members.) In the absence of substantial coverage in reliable secondary sources, this is not a notable company/organization. —C.Fred (talk) 01:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: Username of creator suggests a serious COI, and they have since been blocked. -- Patchy1 05:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - A COI is not a good reason for deletion. Failing WP:GNG and WP:ORG is, though.  Of the six references used in the article, four are not independent of the subject of the article and can't be used to establish notability.  The Atlantic article never even mentions LightHouse which means it does not constitute significant coverage of the subject of this article and can't be used to establish notability.  The last article from Patch.com constitutes significance coverage from an independent (from what I can tell) and reliable source but is only a local source.  A Google News search provides no sources at all that are related to the subject of the article and a either does a Google News Archive search.  None of its members appear to be notable but even if they were, that wouldn't make the organization notable.  While this is a neat idea that students could really benefit from, this subject doesn't appear to be notable under any notability guideline.  As someone who has a bit of experience in this field, getting themselves noticed would be beneficial to their program and would help prove notability.  In any case, they should make sure to read WP:COI and make sure that they're not damaging their image by editing the WP about their own organization.  Ol Yeller21  Talktome  21:06, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per consensus and the fact that this article fails GNG and ORG, while I understand the frustration of this article's creator who can't defend his article, that doesn't change the fact that this article goes against wikipedia guidelines. I suggest the creator of this article copy and information and sources and put it somewhere it's allowed and anyone who needs the information can go there. Longevitydude (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per OlYeller.  GregJackP   Boomer!   23:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:00, 16 January 2013 (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.