Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Women in Entertainment - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Liz (talk | contribs) at 23:10, 7 May 2024 (Women in Entertainment: Closed as delete (XFDcloser)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

Revision as of 23:10, 7 May 2024 by Liz (talk | contribs) (Women in Entertainment: Closed as delete (XFDcloser))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. Liz 23:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Women in Entertainment

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Women in Entertainment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is a stub article that doesn't explain it's notability. As it stands, it appears to qualify for AfD. Nigel757 (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

This article should not be deleted. It provides comprehensive information about a nonprofit organization seeking to do good work. Remma2 (talk) 18:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Please be mindful of WP:USEFUL - just because you believe it provides comprehensive information without explaining why is not a valid Afd argument. If you want the article to be kept, you can demonstrate whether or not it passes notability by showing multiple independent, reliable sources, which the article in its current form does not have. Bandit Heeler (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 23:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

  • Weak keep So far the references are all short announcements of events, plus some mentions in articles about other topics. I think this establishes the "newsworthy-ness" of the organization but only barely meets GNG. I looked for, but did not find, an indepth source about the organization. That is still needed. Lamona (talk) 03:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 23:48, 30 April 2024 (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.