Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/So Others Might Eat


 * 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. Disregarding the !vote from the IP connected to the subject, there is still consensus that there is sufficient coverage in independent secondary reliable sources for the subject to pass WP:GNG. (non-admin closure) — MarkH21talk 23:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

So Others Might Eat

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Since its creation, this article has never had secondary, reliable, independent sources. I do not believe this local charity passes WP:ORGCRITE. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 19:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)


 * comment The group is well-known in the DC area, and the article's sourcing problems are easily overcome. That said, it is local to DC, and I don't know that one would find much coverage from outside the area. Mangoe (talk) 19:55, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep It may be local to DC, but fortunately DC has a highly notable, reliable source newspaper. A quick search of just the Washington Post website pulls up a wealth of articles.  Some mention it in passing, but there are also in depth articles that include detailed information about the facilities and services that this organization provides.  I only linked to two articles to avoid refbombing, but there are plenty more just in the Washington Post.  I would suggest that it is highly likely that other sources will have additional information. Hyperion35 (talk) 21:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So during my WP:BEFORE search I found numerous articles like those you posted but they seem to focus primarily on the subject they are helping making it more of a human interest story than an article about the charity. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 11:49, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Secondary, reliable, independent sources exist. No one has been bold enough to add them yet. ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 13:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: Covered in reliable news websites passes WP:GNG. Namkongville (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep as has significant coverage in reliable sources so there is no need for deletion in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * As a non-DC citizen, it was of my view the sources on this chartiy were not in-depth enough and too local to pass WP:ORGCRITE. I am willing to withdraw this nom but can ya'll provide some in-depth coverage? The ones I found during my WP:BEFORE search all seem to be human interest stories with like a passing mention of the charity. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 00:37, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep it does not fail WP:GNG, has independent sources. Idunnox3 (talk) 01:52, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Hello I am speaking on behalf of SOME - I am actively updating info. Please do not delete. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.247.71 (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2021 (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.