Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shelter Now


 * 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. Consensus is that Shelter Now meets WP:GNG per the sources Rajulbat included in the article. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:55, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Shelter Now

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication of notability. The organization was mentioned in 4 different news articles for the same reason: some of its aid workers were captured by Taliban, and were rescued. Daiyusha (talk) 16:10, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * . The article exists on the German-language edition of Wikipedia. Articles pertaining to similar organizations exist on the English-language edition, e.g., YWAM, SIM (Christian organization). The article is useful for providing context to articles in this edition which contain references or should contain references to the subject organization, e.g.: Christianity in Afghanistan, Freedom of religion in Afghanistan, Heather Mercer, Dayna Curry, 2001 in Afghanistan, Prisoners of Hope, etc. The arrest of Shelter Now's aid workers was a point of tension and potential starting point for negotiations between the Taliban and U.S. administrations following 9/11 (88 Days to Kandahar, p. 92). "[I]ndication[s] of notability" can be supplemented without the need to delete the article.--Rajulbat (talk) 16:33, 29 December 2018 (UTC).
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Rajulbat (talk) 17:01, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Rajulbat (talk) 17:01, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete : let's examine the sources.
 * Conclusion: WP:CORPDEPTH is not satisfied because most of the coverage in major media sources are about one event, namely the Taliban kidnapping. At the most, a section at Foreign hostages in Afghanistan would suffice.    SITH   (talk)   17:45, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Even granting for the sake of argument that your assessment is correct as to the current state of sourcing in the article, "notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not the state of sourcing in an article." There exist sources touching on the subject organization not related to the 2001 kidnapping incident. This is a very new article, created today and within hours of its being proposed for deletion. I will attempt to gather additional supporting sources to prove their existence, and the presumed notability of the topic.--Rajulbat (talk) 21:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC).
 * please do, I'll amend my analysis if you ping me with enough time before the AfD closes and I agree with your assessment of the sources you add.   SITH   (talk)   12:27, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, . At the time of your analysis above, there were six sources. There are now thirty.--Rajulbat (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, . At the time of your analysis above, there were six sources. There are now thirty.--Rajulbat (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment – Note that WP:ONEEVENT is a part of the Wikipedia:Notability (people) page, is only applicable toward human beings, and is not applicable to organizations . North America1000 21:57, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient independent sources exist. There doesnt have to be sustained coverage.Rathfelder (talk) 23:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 10:33, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: changed !vote from delete per significant WP:HEY done by . The article now clearly demonstrates the requisite depth of coverage for an article.    SITH   (talk)   17:43, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Appears to meet WP:GNG, per Rajulbat's sources. Ejgreen77 (talk) 01:53, 10 January 2019 (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.