Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UK Chemical Reaction Hazards Forum


 * 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. Much sadness Spartaz Humbug! 22:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

UK Chemical Reaction Hazards Forum

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As the person who discovered the death of the article's author, former admin Ronhjones, I come to this nomination with a heavy heart. I fpound this page through the first version of his user page and had no idea what to do with the article ... I've come to the conclusion that deletion is the best option. I can't find any evidence that the article subject meets the notability guideline for organisations, simply because I cannot find any inndependent coverage anywhere that is at all significant; I can only find fleeting mentions of the article subject through Google/Google Scholar/Google Books ... and even in the article's own external links, which I've tried to fix to make that point clear. Of the links to the article in the main namespace, one is a disambiguation link and the other two are borderline promotional. Ronhjones created the page when he was a relative newbie to Wikipedia. He was the webmaster of the organisation's website per the article's talk page; indeed the Wayback Machine's coverage of the organisation's site stops on 3 April 2019, four days before his passing. It seems that at some point the organisation was renamed to UK Technical Process Safety Forum; I can't find any significant coverage under that name, nor can I find any by taking "UK" out of the search term of either name ... the new name should not be confused with the Process Safety Forum, which is a different organisation. Graham 87 13:10, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 16:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I spent quite a while looking for sourcing, and there just isn't much. I'd agree with Graham that the organization fails WP:NORG. There are a few sources that mention it in passing, but no WP:SIGCOV.Eddie891 Talk Work 16:39, 18 May 2020 (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.