Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nous 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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:13, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Nous Foundation

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Insufficient depth-of-coverage from reliable sources. TheBigEasyMagazine.com has sigcov, but doesn't appear to be notable. The remaining sources that might qualify as WP:RS either mention the organization in passing or don't mention it at all. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:41, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:37, 12 February 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The Nola.com article specifically mentions the process by which Louisiana joined the Francophonie, which is sourcing the paragraph's text. Concerning Big Easy Magazine, I found two additional articles from Radio Canada and an interview from Beyond Bourbon Street that I added to the source materials. Overall, the article represents noteworthy organizations in Louisiana involved in language revitalization - deleting the article may hurt the public's visibility of ongoing developments to promote French in that state (Louisiana French being an endangered language). The article can be updated to ensure additional sources and the language can be edited by other users as well. I would recommend not deleting the article. Arizeuo (talk) 17:25, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete pretty much per nom, but for clarity, a WP:BEFORE indicates not much coverage other than social media accounts, biz profiles and their own site, press releases (specifically, two), and no literature whatsoever. The dearth of reliable, independent sourcing—the lack of SIGCOV mentioned above—is an immediate WP:NOPAGE-failure. FWIW, also Overall, the article represents noteworthy organizations in Louisiana involved in language revitalization - deleting the article may hurt the public's visibility of ongoing developments to promote French suggests that the intention of the article is pure promotion: this fundamentally flies in the face of policy.  SN54129  19:05, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment To address each concern directly. [1] The WP:BEFORE provides an overview of the organization. The models for this description were the following WP pages Swedish Institute and the Finnish Institute in Tallinn. I took the description from the Radio Canada article (ref. source #2), but I did not use any press releases or social media. I updated the description in the article to differentiate the article's description from the organization’s description online. [2] Sources: Regional, national, and international news sources were cited, as well as an academic work on French in North America. There are also major international journalistic outlets cited, including Agence France Presse and Radio Canada. These sources appear to meet Wikipedia’s sourcing requirements. [3] Promotion: The point made was that Louisiana French does not have much material on Wikipedia that covers noteworthy developments since 2000. The present article was intended to rectify this problem and provide objective coverage of a well-known organization in Louisiana that is involved in Louisiana French. What was intended in my comment is that outright deleting pages about contemporary developments for Louisiana French, rather than maybe helping to rewrite them if there are any concerns, can render less visible the endangered language. [4] Continued polishing of the page: Other Wikipedia contributors edited the page prior and made suggested revisions that were taken into account to improve the article. Rather than delete the page at this time, further suggestions can be taken to refine the content. If those revisions are not addressed or are not sufficient, then the page can then be deleted at that time. Arizeuo (talk) 15:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete Sources of article were analyzed by OhNoitsJamie and SN54129 in perfect figure. I absolutely agree with them.Alimovvarsu (talk) 16:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Based on WP:BASIC, there appear to be a variety of sources. I am familiar with Louisiana-based newspapers like The Times-Picayune/The Advocate (Nola.com) as well as Big Easy Magazine that are reputable sources (e.g., verifiable reliable sources). Further information could be added from the sources listed. Overall, this organization is well known, and I would recommend keeping it and adding further information. Parisnola (talk) 19:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC) — Parisnola (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  —  is a confirmed sock puppet of.
 * The above comment was made by a sock of the previous keep voter; both accounts are now indef blocked. Girth Summit  (blether)  18:05, 21 February 2022 (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.