Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Medaille Trust

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 no consensus, default to keep. - Bobet 08:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Medaille Trust

Unique Google hits for "Medaille Trust" = 9. Fails: Wikipedia:Notability (organizations) guidelines. Lack of available 3rd party references poses Wikipedia:Verifiability problems as well. --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  13:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. 3rd party references have been added. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 05:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 11:22, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete very worthy but non-notable set up in 2006 at a meeting which over 40 representatives attended. Dlyons493 Talk 12:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as notable, needs improvement and expansion. Jon Cates 13:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn —Xyrael 14:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep organisation noted in mainstream press.PeterGrecian 15:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: The Guardian article is about the organisation asking for funding from the UK Home Office. Yes, the organisation is for a worthy cause, but I think we need to wait a bit longer for more press coverage so that its notability can be firmly established before a real article can be started up. --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  16:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep don't know if this counts as these arn't available online, but the organisation has been noted in various charitable and religious newsletters and pieces of nationaly distributed literature Englishnerd 12:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of UK-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 10:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Could do with some improvement, though. --Gray Porpoise 17:57, 16 August 2006 (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.