Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Signals Network


 * 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 delete. No clear Keep arguments after the discussion has been relisted. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:21, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signals Network

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A non profit organisation advocates free press / public right to know. A WP:BEFORE could not find any WP:SIGCOV that supported by WP:RS to pass WP:NCORP.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:55, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:56, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:17, 20 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete No references, doesn't meet WP:GNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mia Watson (talk • contribs) 16:11, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per Mia Watson. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:15, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

*Comment: The organization released an official call for information together with international medias and I think the deletion might be reconsidered. (https://theintercept.com/2018/06/21/the-intercept-welcomes-tech-whistleblowers-as-part-of-a-global-partnership/, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/06/21/new-witness-protection-scheme-whistle-blowers-exposing-technology/). I have other references in German and French, can I add them to the article? Also, could someone tell me how long I have to improve the article before its deletion? Thanks a lot for you feedback. Mathieuleddet (talk) 08:59, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, The piece from Intercept is considered not independent source as they the partner of The Signals Network, but he Telegraph.co.uk is a good source (independent and over in dept of the subject). Sources from any languages are permissible as long as their are secondary sources (independent and reliable) to demonstrate the notability of the subject. The listing of this article for deletion is 7 days from the initial entry date (June 20, 2018) and will be relisted if there are not enough participants in the decision. If you would find and add 2 more sources, I will withdraw the nomination and would love to keep this page. For anything else, do message me on my talk page. Thank you.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 09:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Both new sources (Personal data: five international media launch an investigation from sudouest.fr and UNE PLATEFORME DE MISE EN RELATION ENTRE MÉDIAS ET LANCEURS D'ALERTE from strategies.fr) are interview pieces - they are primary source. At current the article has only 1 source (Telgraph.uk) considered reliable and independent. Article needs significant coverage. Would let other editor to voice on this AfD and see how it would fare. <b style="font-family:Georgia;font-size:80%;color:#FA0"> CASSIOPEIA</b>(<b style="#0000FF">talk</b>) 23:11, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 13:56, 27 June 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.