Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Headlinersuk: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 28: Line 28:
:'''Comment''' the sources don't establish notability. They are little different from ads. --[[User:AndrewHowse|AndrewHowse]] ([[User talk:AndrewHowse|talk]]) 15:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
:'''Comment''' the sources don't establish notability. They are little different from ads. --[[User:AndrewHowse|AndrewHowse]] ([[User talk:AndrewHowse|talk]]) 15:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::*'''Comment''' [[User:Alansohn|Alansohn]] accuses me of drive-by nomination, whilst indulging in drive-by personal attacks in every AfD I submit. [[User:Mayalld|Mayalld]] ([[User talk:Mayalld|talk]]) 15:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::*'''Comment''' [[User:Alansohn|Alansohn]] accuses me of drive-by nomination, whilst indulging in drive-by personal attacks in every AfD I submit. [[User:Mayalld|Mayalld]] ([[User talk:Mayalld|talk]]) 15:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' Is this an ad[http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/01/07/headliners_youthcrime_feature.shtml|ad]? [[User:Ollybenson|Ollybenson]] ([[User talk:Ollybenson|talk]]) 17:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' Is this an [http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/01/07/headliners_youthcrime_feature.shtml | ad]? (published by the BBC today) [[User:Ollybenson|Ollybenson]] ([[User talk:Ollybenson|talk]]) 17:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:08, 7 January 2008

Headlinersuk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete NN organisation. All sources self-published Mayalld (talk) 12:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please explain yourself - what is a NN organisation? Why does an entry exist for Children's Express, our former name, but you won't allow one for our current name? Ollybenson (talk) 12:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment NN = not notable. Mayalld (talk) 12:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The BBC seems an adequate source. The article should perhaps be renamed Headliners which seems to be the proper name of the organisation. Colonel Warden (talk) 13:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The BBC is an excellent source, however non-trivial coverage is required, and whilst the article claims coverage, it provides no evidence of that coverage, and I have been unable to find any myself. Mayalld (talk) 13:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is a link thru to the work Headliners did with BBC Northern Ireland in the recent work section Ollybenson (talk) 13:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The fact that an article for Children's Express is neither here nor there (WP:WAX), in any case, the Chilren's Express article refers to the now-defunct US organisation. While it is a worthy organisation and has had some coverage I do not believe it is significant coverage as per WP:N. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 13:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with regret. Links appear to be statements that the named media organisations support this charity, rather than coverage of it. Not notable. --AndrewHowse (talk) 14:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not sure I follow. There are links to coverage on BBC News 24, BBC Northern Ireland, Sky and I can add more links to our work appearing in other publications and on ITV etc. I don't understand what you guys are looking for. Ollybenson (talk) 14:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The links are like public service announcements, not hard news. Sounds like you have a conflict of interest too! --AndrewHowse (talk) 14:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment So the fact that a Headliners reporter went to Kenya, made a report about young people with HIV/AIDS that was shown on BBC News 24 is classed as a "public service annoucement" by Wikipedia. I've never hidden the fact that I am employed by Headliners; but I don't think that puts me in conflict of interest. All I was trying to do was create an entry based on our existing name rather than a former name. Ollybenson (talk) 14:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If you imagine that (as an employee of this organisation) you don't have a WP:COI, just what do you think does constitute a conflict of interest? Mayalld (talk) 15:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I tried to write a factual entry in line with what I assume Wikipedia requires; without promoting the organisation I work for unfairly. To me, and according to the reference you cite a conflict of interest occurs when I am doing something other than trying to further the aims of Wikipedia. I've got no problem with disclosing that I work for Headliners, and if Wikipedia wants me to declare that information then that's fine. But then I've edited a lot of wikipedia entries on subjects that I have knowledge or an interest in; primarily because I either work or volunteer or have involvement with them. Does that mean there is conflict of interest each time? Ollybenson (talk) 15:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Since you ask, it presents the possibility of a CoI, by my reading of the policy. I tried to look up your other edits, but under this username there are none that I can see. --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment possibility of a CoI is not the same as having a CoI which was what was initially suggested. I've never had to log in to make changes on Wikipedia before, which is why I only registered today. Ollybenson (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-notable, at least for now. It's somewhat telling that the first 2 links on Google for Headliners UK are a dance troupe and an indie band. Comments by Ollybenson above ("...our current name..." etc.), suggest a WP:COI problem here as well. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Do a search for Headliners. The reason it is listed as HeadlinersUK is because Headliners already existed; I don't understand how to change the name to Headliners. Ollybenson (talk) 14:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Possible merge to or from Children's Express - I have added a couple of references to the article but it needs a lot of work. I will flag it for rescue. Fosnez (talk) 15:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment How about moving to Headliners UK, and making it a redirect to Children's Express which mentions the UK org'n and its name change? That then allows for an expanded, properly sourced, article at a later date. This seems like a well-intended situation which hasn't yet met the notability criterion in a demonstrable way. That's the only reason we're having this discussion. --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep adequate reliable and verifiable sources are provided to establish notability. This appears to be yet another questionable drive-by nomination, created within two minutes of the article's creation, hardly sufficient to meet the most perfunctory interpretation of a nominator's obligations under Wikipedia:Deletion policy. I also agree that the article's title does not do justice to the organization and should be renamed to avoid possible misinterpretations. Alansohn (talk) 15:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the sources don't establish notability. They are little different from ads. --AndrewHowse (talk) 15:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is this an | ad? (published by the BBC today) Ollybenson (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]