Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Work Movement


 * 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. low participation AfD, nominator raises good points, this would be a borderline CSD A7 in my opinion. Seeing no further discussion after 2 re-list closing as uncontested PRODlike Tawker (talk) 05:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Work Movement

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject lacks significant coverage in multiple secondary, independent and reliable sources, therefore fails Wikipedia general notability guideline and Wikipedia notability guideline for companies and organizations. Almost all sources link to the subject's database entry. However beside data entries there are four other sources in the article, one YouTube link (unreliable), one press release (unreliable), and two dead links. There is nothing helpful found on Google news and Google books. Perhaps creator would like to throw some light on the claim, which describe the subject in the lead subject as, "a global social enterprise". To me, subject qualifies deletion according to Wikipedia deletion policy for failing notability. Anupmehra - Let's talk!  09:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

The improvements suggested has been made in the article. The information contained in the article is of high use to the public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.166.25.199 (talk) 23:06, 30 July 2014 (UTC) Information updated. References added. Content is neutral and of public benefit. Oskar Uhlig — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oskaruhlig (talk • contribs) 12:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC) 
 * Delete per nom. The improvements referred to by 222.166.25.199 & Oskaruhlig have not adequately addressed the problem of the subject failing WP:GNG & WP:NCORP. Virtually all of its citations are primary, not reliable secondary, sources.--JayJasper (talk) 17:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 01:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 22:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

 what's the problem? get a life. article seems fine to me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oskaruhlig (talk • contribs) 08:01, 19 August 2014 (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.