Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rightrides


 * 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. Needs a decent cleanup, though. - Mailer Diablo 09:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Rightrides
Probably copyvio of a non-notable organisations web page.--Peta 07:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, couldn't find anything on Google that shows this to be copyvio; however, this does read like a press release. I think a little cleanup and a couple of sources would fix this up; looks like a couple of NY-oriented and gay-lifestyle magazines cover the group, so it shouldn't be hard to wrangle. -- H·G (words/works) 08:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Followup - well, clearly large parts of this article were taken from here and reworded a bit. So yeah, the article definitely needs cleanup--at least proper citation and adherence to copyright policy. -- H·G (words/works) 09:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep, conditional on massive, massive cleanup. Stop get rid of the press-release style headline, for a start. --David Mestel(Talk) 16:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is a paraphrase of this page so not technically a copyvio, but needs to be re-written. -- Aguerriero  ( talk ) 17:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment what actually makes this group notable, night partols like this exist many towns.--Peta 22:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. In my opinion, it doesn't fail notability criteria. Though WP:ORG is still only a proposed guideline, something it shares with existing guidelines like WP:CORP is that organizations that are the subject of multiple non-trivial media articles qualify as notable. There are several to be found on Google to say nothing of the print, TV, and radio stories archived on the organization's own website. The uniqueness of the patrol's focus (on safety for "women, transpeople and gender queer individuals") combined with this makes it notable enough that an article on WP isn't unwarranted, as I see it. -- H·G (words/works) 23:29, 13 July 2006 (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.