Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reading With Rover


 * 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   no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 22:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Reading With Rover

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Attention solely from local media with the a trivial mention in a single source from out of the region. Also, only trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources Cptnono (talk) 08:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: An alternative to deletion could be allowing a stub based on this Seattle based company and the couple other similar programs found elsewhere.Cptnono (talk) 08:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I support merging what's there (which is really only a mention) into a broader article on the subject. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:29, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Google News has four mentions within the past month, meeting the GNG. Flagged for rescue--can someone integrate these? Jclemens (talk) 01:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Examiner is not RS. The cool thing is that those all mention separate cities. If local attention is given to those in RS the scope of the article can be adjusted to the movement of such organizations.Cptnono (talk) 01:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * As mentioned in the discussion earlier, this was kept because of its relevance to social trends. Please see the discussion page for the article. These other additions are welcome, too. Wakablogger2 (talk) 06:18, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keeping it was a mistake unless we can find valid sources (WP:RELIABLE) that go into detail on the social trend. If someone finds those and adds them it should be kept. I have had a hard time finding such sources in a few attempts over the last several months. The coverage is not signifigant from what I have found and does not meet the the level of noteworthiness required for the project. Personally, I do find it interesting and think it would be great if someone could find those.Cptnono (talk)
 * Here are some links that describe how dogs are being used these days. In the past, dogs were used for rescue or for the blind. In recent decades, however, the social uses for dogs has grown greatly, and the Reading with Rover article is important because it is indicative of that trend and because it is an important part of the culture in Washington State (whose project it belongs to).

[]
 * Dogs for the Blind
 * Hearing and Signal Dogs
 * Assistance Dogs
 * Canine Companions for Independence
 * Assistance Dog International (ADI)
 * Paws with a Cause (PAWS)
 * National Education for Assistance Dog Services, Inc.
 * Therapy Dogs

[]
 * Autism
 * Aspergers
 * Mental Health D/O
 * Dementia
 * Mild Mental Retardation
 * Brain Injury (traumatic or chemical)

[] for children with autism and their families Wakablogger2 (talk) 07:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Here are two more, this time from books:

[] A recent growing trend is the training of "service dogs." These animals help physically handicapped owners by fetching dropped objects, pulling wheelchairs up ramps, forcing open heavy doors, and doing other tasks that allow their owners to achieve independence despite their handicaps. - Opportunities in animal and pet care careers by Richard Sandoval Lee

[] An animal may participate with a person in pet therapy at many levels. The most basic function would be to provide companionship and affection, allowing patients to pet and stroke the animal. A higher level of therapy would be the use of dogs that are trained to allow patients to groom them, hold them, and engage in closer care of them. - Spiritual care in nursing practice By Kristen L. Mauk, Nola A. Schmidt, page 261.

Wakablogger2 (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. Unfortunately, we still need to have significant coverage. Your primary sources and google book sources are also more along the lines of therapy dogs and service dogs.Cptnono (talk) 22:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, those sources indicate how animals are being used in society today, an incredible trend that nobody would have guessed just a few decades ago. Here are some cites from newspapers and TV that talk about Reading with Rover:


 * [] KOMO news: We all know that dogs can learn to fetch or sit on command, but what about helping children with their reading? That's the concept behind an innovative program in Woodinville that's being featured on national TV....Moose and Becky are at Woodmoor Elementary for Reading With Rover, a program she helped create. It's where kids who have trouble reading read aloud to therapy dogs.


 * [] The Seattle Times: [The dog's] expression never changed, not even when Nicholas stumbled over tricky words like "guava." ...That's the whole idea behind "Reading with Rover," a summer program for children at the Bothell and Kenmore branches of the King County Regional Library System. The program pairs companion dogs with kids who may be uncomfortable reading aloud. The dogs provide their rapt attention and the children can read aloud without fear of criticism or interruption....Wu modeled the Bothell program after a two-year-old program at the Salt Lake City Public Library called Reading Education Assistance Dogs (READ), which also pairs children with trained therapy dogs who listen patiently as children read.


 * [] The Seattle Times: Reading with Rover pairs trained dogs with children struggling to read. The child reads aloud to the dog, building confidence and reducing stress.


 * [] Seattle PI: Bourbon is one of eight dogs that visit Woodmoor on Thursdays under a program called "Reading with Rover," designed to boost literacy skills for children who have difficulty mastering them.


 * [] nwnews.com: Woodinville’s own Becky Bishop, and her Reading with Rover program are once more the subject of attention, only this time, it’s on a national level....A production crew from the show “Animal Planet” came to Woodin- ville [sic] recently to film Bishop and her Reading with Rover teams of handlers and their dogs. They shot footage in the reading lab at Woodmoor Elementary for a segment on an upcoming documentary, narrated by Jane Goodall, focusing on animal-human communication....Reading with Rover began about five years ago when Bothell librarian MieMie Wu approached Bishop about the idea of having kids read to dogs. Wu had heard about a program in Utah called R.E.A.D. (Reading Education Assistance Dogs), which uses dogs to help kids improve their reading skills and increase their confidence. She set out to start a similar program in Washington and named it “Reading with Rover.”


 * Even more cites can be found at []. Wakablogger2 (talk) 05:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, this is all local. It does not meet the requirements required for an organization to have an article. If the article is supposed to be about more than local add to the therapeutic dog article per the sources you mentioned previously or find significant coverage of a national/international trend. Take a look at Notability (organizations and companies) Cptnono (talk) 05:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * So the Seattle Times and the Seattle PI are local? What is regional? We don't have a Washington Times... The only other thing is the Animal Planet. I think it's an important part of a trend, the articles in the major newspapers give it press. I give up now. Good luck and I hope someone finds a "regional" newspaper. Wakablogger2 (talk) 06:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It is local coverage of a local organization. People as close as Yakima and Portland probably haven't heard a thing. Regardless of that, the article has been here to improve for months but it doesn't like it could be. Even if someone would have stuffed information in it would be better in other preexisting articles.Cptnono (talk) 06:38, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep There are plenty of notable news organizations that have given coverage to this.   D r e a m Focus  05:58, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  22:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. Non-notable. Doctorfluffy (wanna get fluffed?) 07:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep From Google Scholar and Google News:
 * http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=OrINAAAAIBAJ&sjid=VXIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4472,599979
 * http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/snohomishcountynews/2001984144_firstbooks21n.html
 * http://www.seattlepi.com/moore/267929_moore25.html
 * http://www.newsherald.com/news/city-71015-panama-rover.html
 * http://www.etsu.edu/coe/cuai/issues_RT/TN%20READ%202002%201.pdf (pages 27-28) — Rankiri (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Reminder: The sources mentioned above are local coverage of different unaffiliated groups. Please keep this in mind if the article is edited to show that.Cptnono (talk) 22:56, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What kind of locale covers Tennessee Reading Teacher, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, The Seattle Times and News Herald Panama City? The Northern Hemisphere? — Rankiri (talk) 14:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * They are all local coverage of different local groups. If someone can make the article about the push for such programs I would not object but so far I don't see signifigant coverage as a whole.Cptnono (talk) 14:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What can I say? When in doubt, don't delete. The extensive local news coverage certainly hints at notability and WP:GNG doesn't say anything about refusing local sources. — Rankiri (talk) 15:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Guidelines for organizations (WP:GROUP) state that the subject must be "The scope of their activities is national or international in scale". It goes on to say "Organizations whose activities are local in scope may be notable where there is verifiable information from reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area" Since they are not related organizations, this second part does not allow for the article since it is only of a local scale without significant coverage from non local sources. The information might be better in the other dog related links mentioned above or will have to be worked into an article about the general idea. I think it is a great program and should be mentioned somewhere on Wikipedia but it doesn't meet the criteria for an independent article.Cptnono (talk) 01:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please read carefully. These are the alternative notability criteria for specific types of organizations: The following sections discuss other alternate methods for establishing notability in specific situations. However, the text of the article must be supported by independent sources, and avoid primary research. Note that failure to meet these criteria does not disprove notability if it can be otherwise demonstrated. The very first sentence of WP:GROUP clearly states that [a]n organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. — Rankiri (talk) 02:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I did read that. It could also be argued that it is noteworthy enough based soley on GNG. I still feel that this particular situation calls for a deletion. As I have stated, if someone reworks the scope fo the article (my rough drafts have all failed) I would be less inclined to be pushing for a deletion.Cptnono (talk) 02:45, 12 August 2009 (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.