Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parents' Choice Award


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 04:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Parents' Choice Award

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

NN Marketing-style award from a NN foundation. It seems that the only coverage of this award is in authors or reviews of books claiming that they won it or stores promoting books that have won this award. There are a few articles telling folks that such an award exists among a list of others (like the Carter article) but nothing in-depth to pass WP:GNG. Toddst1 (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep well-established award, see for example Toys and American Culture: An Encyclopedia -E-Kartoffel (talk) 11:06, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That shows WP:Notability how? Yes, the awards have been given.   Established != notable.  Toddst1 (talk) 00:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'd also support shifting the article's focus to the foundation over the award. In-depth coverage of the foundation exists in sources from not currently used in the article, such as a 1988 LA Times piece, a 2012 one from the WSJ, and a 1995 Washington Post piece. While these all discuss the awards, they treat the organization as more significant. The awards have received some individual attention without mention of the organization itself (a different WaPo article states that "a further indicator of a book's quality is whether it has ... received a Parents' Choice award", then goes onto describe what the awards evaluate), but this is lesser compared to the foundation's coverage. Squiddaddy (talk) 02:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 01:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per the findings of Squiddaddy  Yoshiman6464   ♫🥚 01:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - agree with Squiddaddy. A cursory search of newspapers.com found over 600 articles that mention it going back to the 1980s, giving it WP:SUSTAINED cred as well, and the fact that the Parents' Choice Foundation just redirects to this page shows that some article is needed here. Even if the focus is not quite aimed correctly yet, this is definitely an article that needs to exist in some form and should not be deleted. Sweet kate (talk) 00:22, 23 February 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.