Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Redemption Paws


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 17:59, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Redemption Paws

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

Dated information and allegations not helpful to take any view on adoption of dogs from the charity 1nicknamesb (talk) 17:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 14.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 17:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters. —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 17:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal, Organizations,  and Canada.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen&times; &#9742;  05:24, 22 May 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: A flawed nomination is not a reason for a procedural close once a valid Delete !vote has been voiced. Please address the sourcing to determine if this meets our guidelines. Thank you. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen&times; &#9742;  12:06, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep and Procedural Close, as no deletion argument has been presented. The article certainly needs to be rewritten to remove POV issues, but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP and the references in the article already present the subject's notability. Silver  seren C 01:11, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Deletion is requested based on dated news articles, no more relevant. 1nicknamesb (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Being sourced to older articles is not a basis for deletion alone, but only appears to be significant coverage of the organization itself so I don't think it passes WP:NORG. The sources seem to be news (WP:NOTNEWS) about an injured dog and imported pets or routine coverage of a small local organization. Reywas92Talk 17:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Here's significant coverage of the group covering years that I found in multiple different publications,.
 * 39 dogs that survived Hurricane Harvey now in Toronto area
 * How Canadians Are Rescuing Homeless Dogs from Hurricane Harvey
 * They've got it ruff; Rescue dogs to be euthanized if they can't cross border
 * Puplifting conclusion; Federal minister steps up to save pooches
 * 'Difficult' dogs failed by charity, fosters allege (Page 2)
 * These sources cover the history of the group, how it formed, and its activities over the years, both good and bad. Silver  seren C 20:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep per Silverseren's evidence, most of his sources are inaccessible but I am assuming good faith (ping me if it turns out these sources don't establish notability). Article is in a poor state but can be fixed and I've already removed nonsense like the Google Reviews from the article. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There's also likely external influence on the article (and possibly this AfD) due to some controversial claims in the article. See also Articles for deletion/Nicole Simone (2nd nomination) Traumnovelle (talk) 21:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.