Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blue Alliance

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 keep‎. SIGCOV and GNG guidelines met. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 04:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Blue Alliance

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Blue Alliance (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)

I couldn't establish that it meets WP:ORG or WP:GNG. This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; I hope we can now resolve it. Boleyn (talk) 20:02, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:22, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:22, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Enough available to pass WP:NONPROFIT. Some examples: two pages of discussion in Attitudes Aren't Free: A Call to Action (pp145-147), mentioned in ABC News article (2012), recognition from the USAF itself, Gay graduates stepping out at Air Force (2011), Gay students savor military's openness (2012). Clean up, yes, deletion, unnecessary. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 05:52, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:05, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - I agree that the notibility standards for nonprofits have been low in other articles, but that’s not an argument to ignore policy in this case. There are no sources justifying notability. Llajwa (talk) 18:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

• Keep (weak): Meets GNG: [1], [2] meet SIGCOV from IRS. might be more, didn't look because these two are enough for me. WP:NONPROFIT just points to GNG, "The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization." Agree that if kept, cleanup is needed.  // Timothy :: talk  03:08, 9 February 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.