Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tzedek (UK Charity)


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:24, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Tzedek (UK Charity)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Does not meet WP:ORG. References are to the subject's own web site, its founder, or to coalitions and umbrella organizations of which the subject is a part. None deal directly and substantially with the subject. Bsherr (talk) 18:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment There appear to be mentions in the following sources:
 * All are easy to find on Google Books. Are these enough for notability?  Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Is it clear that any/all of these references are to this organisation rather than to the wider Hebrew word for righteousness? Taking that back having checked: now a Keep on the basis of these examples. AllyD (talk) 20:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I expect so. --Bsherr (talk) 20:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * All are easy to find on Google Books. Are these enough for notability?  Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Is it clear that any/all of these references are to this organisation rather than to the wider Hebrew word for righteousness? Taking that back having checked: now a Keep on the basis of these examples. AllyD (talk) 20:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I expect so. --Bsherr (talk) 20:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I expect so. --Bsherr (talk) 20:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep: Notable as demonstrated by the numerous references found by Kenilworth Terrace. Inniverse (talk) 22:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Current form of article clearly demonstrates that the GNG is satisfied. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:43, 27 August 2010 (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.