Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New York City Coalition Against Hunger (NYCCAH)


 * 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) 02:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

New York City Coalition Against Hunger (NYCCAH)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Some good refs there, but the only refs that cite the company itself aren't third party. Island Monkey talk the talk 06:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Although it appears that the article was written by someone close to the organization and needs a cleanup, it seems that the organization itself is notable. It is widely referred to in the mainstream press and its publications/research have been cited in several journals, academic papers and books.  The question is whether the coverage is trivial and, because much of it is only quotations from the organization or its employees, there is a risk that the notability definition is not strictly met.  On balance, however, I would lean towards keeping the article and hoping someone can improve it.  Wikipeterproject (talk) 07:54, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep This article does have a balanced POV. The style of writing could be improved (In my opinion). If it is not balanced please state examples where you believe the text denotes this imbalance.--User:Warrior777 (talk) 11:51, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article's topic is significant and deserves its own article; the article simply needs work.Helios Entity 2 (talk) 03:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with the previous arguments. The article's topic is notable enough to deserve its own page and the writing does not seem significantly bias to deserve deletion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dyg2104 (talk • contribs) 14:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - appears notable, and there's definitely independent sourcing, but the sourcing isn't quite as strong as I'd like to see.-- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Needs to be Wikified, and kept out of the hands of COI editors, but could make for a good topic.--BristolRobin (talk) 13:55, 23 June 2011 (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.