Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Online Abuse Prevention Initiative


 * 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. Consensus is that the notability guidelines are now met with the coverage found during this discussion. Davewild (talk) 06:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Online Abuse Prevention Initiative

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't seem to meet notability guidelines. The source used only mentions the initiative's existence in passing. Only other coverage I've found is gamepolitics which mentions the initiative in passing in relation to other issues, and The Open Source which I'm not sure is an RS. Bosstopher (talk) 17:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Delete Non-notable topic due to insufficient coverage in reliable sources. The requisite coverage now appears to be there, if The Guardian and USA Today are writing about it in depth then it's notable. (And thanks to  for the ping, it didn't work for some reason but I saw it on my watchlist)  Philg88 ♦talk 18:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T&middot;E&middot;C) 18:02, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T&middot;E&middot;C) 18:03, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete but draft/userfy if wished I suppose, as my searches here and here easily found nothing good. SwisterTwister   talk  06:17, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom and Swister. CorporateM (Talk) 07:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. The organization and its activities have attracted significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources—specifically, the group and its campaign against ICANN's proposal to de-anonymize domain name WHOIS records are the subject of full-length articles in The Guardian  and Clubic .  There also appears to be some brief and indirect criticism of the group in other sources such as Breitbart —I'm not sure whether this is admissible (even under WP:BIASED) as it's more about the group's founder personally than the organization itself.  I have just expanded the article on the basis of the Guardian and Clubic coverage; if anyone wants to make a case for including anything from Breitbart I suggest that this could be discussed on the talk page. —Psychonaut (talk) 19:43, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Pinging previous !voters in response to major changes to the article. Personally at this point I'm undecided on whether or not this counts as enough coverage. However, if it does get deleted its probably worth userfying in case further coverage ensues. Thanks for improving the article Psychonaut. Bosstopher (talk) 20:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * There's also an article in USA Today which has four paragraphs about OAPI and its ICANN campaign . —Psychonaut (talk) 21:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with Bosstopher but if I had to choose, I'd go with weak keep to almost keep simply because of the added sources. SwisterTwister   talk  21:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Still delete for me. The sources provided are strong RS', but they only feature a sentence or paragraph related to this organization, and mostly not even about it directly, so much as about its commentary on a subject. Not enough for CORPDEPTH. My delete vote is hopeless, now that relevance has been established with a subject most Wikipedians have a special interest in, so I understand that consensus will go the other way. CorporateM (Talk) 06:43, 19 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep One of the few notable organizations to arise out of the Gamergate controversy. Ideally, I'd say merge this to a Randi Harper article but that article doesn't exist. Additional sources helped move this from a weak keep to keep. Liz  Read! Talk! 22:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Switching to Keep I'll withdraw the AfD if has no objections to me doing so. (hopefully the ping should work this time) Brustopher (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC) Just realised I forgot to ping . Sorry Brustopher (talk) 19:47, 19 July 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.