- 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. It isn't clear how many sources found in the searches are really significant coverage, but given that all the participants aside from the nominator have favored keeping based on finding material that is at least reliable and non-promotional, I'm willing to accept their belief that adequate sources probably exist. RL0919 ( talk) 23:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
American Sanctuary Association
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- American Sanctuary Association ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It would seem reasonable to expect that an organization
- set up in 1998
- in the United States
- that certifies other organizations for animal welfare standards compliance
would have a significant internet footprint.
Doing the required
WP:BEFORE due diligence, I note that the
Yellowstone Wildlife Sanctuary article links its accreditation
via the http://asaanimalsanctuaries.org/ website.
It would appear to me that this article at best fails the
WP:ORGDEPTH /
WP:GNG tests for notability. At worst, it appears to be all kind of things that are not in the scope of this WP:AFD discussion. Pete AU aka
Shirt58 (
talk) 10:05, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 10:09, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 10:09, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 21:31, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Rationale for keeping
(I'm the one that created the article)
- Being the only American organization accrediting animal sanctuaries for animal welfare standards compliance creates some level of notability.
- Notability guidelines tend to focus on organizations that directly work with large numbers of people. The ASA generally does not deal with the public at all. Since their mission is to accredit sanctuaries, they operate behind the scenes, which doesn't generate the in-depth coverage that notability guidelines may look for.
- I will certainly accept blame for not searching out more articles and links. As someone who works in the animal sanctuary business, I made the unwarranted assumption that the association was better known. I will do some further research and attempt to improve this article in the next few days.
While Shirt58 correctly points out that the Internet footprint of the ASA is small, there are some valid reasons for that:
- The organization has never had a tech-savvy staff member or board member
- The ASA is funded through membership dues, so they don't have a fundraising presence
- Their online discussion forum is a password-protected Yahoo group, so it doesn't register on search engines
- The website is being redesigned. They currently have two domains pointed to their old site ( http://asaanimalsanctuaries.org/ and http://asasanctuaries.org/ ) and one to the new site, ( https://www.americansanctuaries.org/ ).
Gary D Robson 23:38, 2 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary D Robson ( talk • contribs)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 ( talk) 05:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 18:15, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep - A quick news search finds a bunch of sources that can be used. I also found 25 journal articles. Seems notable to me. -- Nessie ( talk) 14:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per Nessie. I have already used in the article one of the printed sources he found, thanks.-- Darius ( talk) 21:19, 22 December 2019 (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.
- 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. It isn't clear how many sources found in the searches are really significant coverage, but given that all the participants aside from the nominator have favored keeping based on finding material that is at least reliable and non-promotional, I'm willing to accept their belief that adequate sources probably exist. RL0919 ( talk) 23:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
American Sanctuary Association
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- American Sanctuary Association ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It would seem reasonable to expect that an organization
- set up in 1998
- in the United States
- that certifies other organizations for animal welfare standards compliance
would have a significant internet footprint.
Doing the required
WP:BEFORE due diligence, I note that the
Yellowstone Wildlife Sanctuary article links its accreditation
via the http://asaanimalsanctuaries.org/ website.
It would appear to me that this article at best fails the
WP:ORGDEPTH /
WP:GNG tests for notability. At worst, it appears to be all kind of things that are not in the scope of this WP:AFD discussion. Pete AU aka
Shirt58 (
talk) 10:05, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 10:09, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 10:09, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 21:31, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Rationale for keeping
(I'm the one that created the article)
- Being the only American organization accrediting animal sanctuaries for animal welfare standards compliance creates some level of notability.
- Notability guidelines tend to focus on organizations that directly work with large numbers of people. The ASA generally does not deal with the public at all. Since their mission is to accredit sanctuaries, they operate behind the scenes, which doesn't generate the in-depth coverage that notability guidelines may look for.
- I will certainly accept blame for not searching out more articles and links. As someone who works in the animal sanctuary business, I made the unwarranted assumption that the association was better known. I will do some further research and attempt to improve this article in the next few days.
While Shirt58 correctly points out that the Internet footprint of the ASA is small, there are some valid reasons for that:
- The organization has never had a tech-savvy staff member or board member
- The ASA is funded through membership dues, so they don't have a fundraising presence
- Their online discussion forum is a password-protected Yahoo group, so it doesn't register on search engines
- The website is being redesigned. They currently have two domains pointed to their old site ( http://asaanimalsanctuaries.org/ and http://asasanctuaries.org/ ) and one to the new site, ( https://www.americansanctuaries.org/ ).
Gary D Robson 23:38, 2 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gary D Robson ( talk • contribs)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 ( talk) 05:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 18:15, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep - A quick news search finds a bunch of sources that can be used. I also found 25 journal articles. Seems notable to me. -- Nessie ( talk) 14:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per Nessie. I have already used in the article one of the printed sources he found, thanks.-- Darius ( talk) 21:19, 22 December 2019 (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.