Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MedEquip4Kids
- 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. ✗plicit 14:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- MedEquip4Kids (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)
A good charity, but no real indication of notability. QueenofBithynia (talk) 22:01, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 22:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- How so? A simple Duckduckgo search turns up some possible sources:
- http://www.bayhospitalscharity.org/medequip4kids-vinci-donation-resuscitaires/
- https://workforgood.co.uk/charities/medequip4kids/
- https://delphislearning.com/news/delphis-learning-supports-medequip4kids-hummingbird-project-launch/
- https://manchestercommunitycentral.org/volunteer-centre-manchester/crisis-volunteering/7016
- These could be incorporated into the article, so i am leaning towards week keep. (weak because I dont think they are the strongest of sources, but good enough) Rlink2 (talk) 04:53, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - Per WP:NONPROFIT, even though the charitable organization is Manchester-based, it has received some brief national coverage, e.g. ITV 2014, OT Magazine, 2015, and they have appeared on the BBC Radio 4 Appeal. They have a major accomplishment profiled by a 2015 NHS press release, and a previous one reported by the Manchester Evening News in 2010, as well as a fair amount of local coverage, e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4] and they are involved in the development of the Hummingbird Project, e.g. [5], (the project is further discussed without reference to the organization here: The Hummingbird Project: A Positive Psychology Intervention for Secondary School Students (Frontiers in Psychology, Aug 2020), but these sources do not appear to be sufficient
substantial verifiable evidence of coverage by reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area
to support notability per the WP:ORG guideline. Beccaynr (talk) 00:54, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:08, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - A Google News search indicates that it's been covered in the news, but all of those are passing mentions. The article fails WP:NOTPROMOTION in the sense of both how the article is written and lack of assertion for future improvement beyond just sounding like promotional material. There are no sources that actually go in depth about the charity itself, except for the official website, which is a primary source anyway and violates Wikipedia's standards of verifiability and inclusion.—Mythdon (talk • contribs) 12:34, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Coverage mainly limited to one line mentions. Fails WP:ORG. LibStar (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2022 (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.