Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of youth organizations


 * 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 keep. postdlf (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

List of youth organizations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No sources nor precise definition of what the list is listing Saturnalia0 (talk) 16:09, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 19:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep. Sigh. We have Category:Youth organizations but no Youth organization. I guess the list may have some use (if it is sortable, presents stuff by country, etc.), but really, someone should stub the main topic. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:15, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Linguist un Eins uno 16:59, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:LISTOUTCOMES pursuant to the guideline on categories, lists, and navigation templates with emphasis on WP:NOTDUP. Sam Sailor 03:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Did I said it was a duplicate of a category? WP:LISTOUTCOMES specifically mentions the content has to be verifiable. Saturnalia0 (talk) 03:07, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Youth organizations. Also keep per WP:LISTPURP as a useful navigational aid, which is evidenced in part by the 6,239 page views it has received in the last thirty days (as of this post). I have also added content and sources in the lead to provide more context. North America1000 09:11, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NOTDUP as per above. I do agree that the main topic should have an entry and be defined. The list itself is navigational, and does not need sourcing or assertion of notability. As long as they point to an article in en.WP and the article is about the subject (Youth Org), then I have no issues. Any redlinks or no links do not belong (also links to non-youth org entries of course). -- Alexf(talk) 22:18, 6 December 2017 (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.