Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WildVenture


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

WildVenture

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails the general notability guideline and WP:ORG. I can find no references to it in any news articles. It is also written like an advert. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 09:03, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.
 * Delete per nomination, borderline G11 speedy: a small volunteer organization for conservation, research, and community support projects. Many conservation and community projects are currently helped by WildVenture's volunteers, promotion and funding.[citation needed] Each expedition works with local experts in their field and have qualified personnel on site. The only reference that isn't purely self published reveals that one of the founders has written a paper about the dormouse. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. I'm could be hesitant about this because of WP:CLUB, since the scope of this organization can be considered international. However, it clearly states that the organization has to meet both standards, and the second one just happens to be about multiple third-party sources. This is something that the article lacks and something that I could not find. Of the five sources that the article currently has, one is the organization's website. The other four don't mention the organization, or include a passing mention if they do. This shows that the organization is not notable, since sources are really what determine notability. --Slon02 (talk) 22:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - No coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 18:53, 3 February 2011 (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.