Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/People with Disability Australia


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:43, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

People with Disability Australia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article currently has no independent sources at all. A Google search shows only minimal mainstream media coverage, thus the notability of this organization is doubtful. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC) Withdraw nomination article has been improved with good (but hard to find) sources. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:36, 19 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep: On the contrary, the organization title suffers from the use of generic terms, and recent changes have removed potentially useful information. These do not make the article suitable for deletion. The deletion proposal should be withdrawn. Current page status is not necessarily an indication of notability per WP:CONTN and time would be better spent improving the page. Tailored searches produce good independent sources. A search for the outgoing president Craig Wallace and "PWDA" returns 2230 Google search results alone, including national media, a federal Parliamentary Library Lecture, and a statement read to Parliament on the occasion of his resignation. Trankuility (talk) 09:35, 17 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:50, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:51, 17 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Strong keep Very significant WP:NEXIST, to support a much better, more in-depth article.   Aoziwe (talk) 12:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment My WP:BEFORE search turned up a bunch of passing mentions and "sound bites", nothing that satisfies WP:CORPDEPTH, existence ≠ notability. I have tagged several points that need specific sourcing - if they can be filled it would be a keeper. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:28, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think I have filled them in. There may well be more and-or better references, but I know nothing about the organisation and specifically where to look for the ones you asked for.  Aoziwe (talk) 09:44, 18 July 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.