Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wheels For Wishes


 * 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 no consensus. Article should be considerably revised as well. (non-admin closure)  J 947  21:32, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Wheels For Wishes

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-profit with no meaningful press coverage other than in connection with the Make-A-Wish Foundation (fails WP:INHERITORG). Notably, the only press coverage not listed in the article appears to be a series of reports alleging that the foundation misled consumers. E.g.,, which makes me very suspicious about the origins of this article. But even adding those sources would not add up to WP:ORG as once-off reports that a charity is not kosher don't make the charity inherently notable. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 11:31, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:28, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:28, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:28, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:48, 10 March 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —MRD2014 📞 contribs 03:05, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep only if sharply revised' per this gNews search:   This "charity" has been exposed as semi-fraudulent, and dumpec by at least one chapter of  the Make a Wish Foundation.  Certainly we cannot keep it in it's present form.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:30, 24 March 2017 (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.