Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milstein Family Foundation


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 17:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Milstein Family Foundation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has been deleted at least once in pretty much its current form, and the original editor User:Jewishsarah(User talk:Jewishsarah) was blocked for her persistence. I'm sure the Foundation does great work, and the Milsteins look like lovely people, but there is no real assertion of notability, its references do not meet the general notability guidelines, and the tone is promotional. I think the author needs to wait until there is serious press coverage of the foundation, demonstrating notability. ubiquity (talk) 18:10, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, ubiquity. Please review, there is quite a bit of different information than what User:Jewishsarah(User talk:Jewishsarah) was publishing. There are sources such as the Los Angeles Times, Reuters, and The Times of Israel. Therowervz (talk) 18:38, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment There is Californian press coverage relating to the foundation but it appears to me to be all about one event. See, and . 24.151.10.165 (talk) 18:44, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  19:55, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  19:55, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  19:55, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Most of this article is unreferenced. Much of the rest is backed by citations to self published sources. There are some sources in third-party publications, but not enough to meet WP:GNG or pass WP:NORG.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  00:06, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep For this Foundation and its beneficiaries, the various third-party Jewish trade publications that are cited in this article are highly relevant to people that would be searching about this Foundation on the web. If you were to speak to any of the editors-in-chief at any of these publications they would confirm the authenticity and good works of the Foundation. Therowervz (talk) 00:19, 21 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Notability isn't supported, the reliable sources cited just mention it as tangential to something else, basically. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 04:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Poetlister and TungstenCarbide can you join the conversation here? I saw your comments on a different discussion about this page and would appreciate your support. Therowervz (talk) 21:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Calling on two blocked / banned users isn't going to help your case here much. And it could be perceived as WP:Canvassing, which is not allowed.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 02:50, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiDan61 I didn't realize they were blocked, I saw a post they made on another page about this foundation page having reliable sources and thought it would help if it was a part of this conversation. Therowervz (talk) 17:37, 27 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 22:27, 29 January 2015 (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.