- 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Bound Together
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bound Together ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not meet WP:NORG, lacks significant, independent, reliable and secondary coverage with in depth coverage within publications that have wide audience base. The coverage in major papers like LA Times is rather thin. So, there's no indication that it meets adequately coverage to establish notability to merit stand alone article. Disregard the first AfD. It was for something entirely unrelated with the same name that has been deleted; and this one has been created under the same title. Graywalls ( talk) 04:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Graywalls ( talk) 04:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Graywalls ( talk) 04:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- I've added a few alt weekly sources but haven't yet found, for example, a feature on the bookstore/collective in its 44 years. Will be curious to see what others make of it. Nothing substantive found in historical EBSCOhost, ProQuest, Gale federated searches. czar 07:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- So, do you feel that it could actually meet
WP:NORG and what's your !vote?
Graywalls (
talk)
18:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
- On the fence/lean delete/waiting to see what others find. Could potentially redirect to the Anarchist bookfair article where it's mentioned but eh a bit of a stretch czar 02:55, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- So, do you feel that it could actually meet
WP:NORG and what's your !vote?
Graywalls (
talk)
18:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 10:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 10:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails GNG/ WP:NCORP. HighKing ++ 18:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
- Keep discussed in detail in more than one independent source Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 01:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 ( talk) 01:10, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 ( talk) 01:10, 21 October 2020 (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 no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Bound Together
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bound Together ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not meet WP:NORG, lacks significant, independent, reliable and secondary coverage with in depth coverage within publications that have wide audience base. The coverage in major papers like LA Times is rather thin. So, there's no indication that it meets adequately coverage to establish notability to merit stand alone article. Disregard the first AfD. It was for something entirely unrelated with the same name that has been deleted; and this one has been created under the same title. Graywalls ( talk) 04:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Graywalls ( talk) 04:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Graywalls ( talk) 04:31, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- I've added a few alt weekly sources but haven't yet found, for example, a feature on the bookstore/collective in its 44 years. Will be curious to see what others make of it. Nothing substantive found in historical EBSCOhost, ProQuest, Gale federated searches. czar 07:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- So, do you feel that it could actually meet
WP:NORG and what's your !vote?
Graywalls (
talk)
18:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
- On the fence/lean delete/waiting to see what others find. Could potentially redirect to the Anarchist bookfair article where it's mentioned but eh a bit of a stretch czar 02:55, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- So, do you feel that it could actually meet
WP:NORG and what's your !vote?
Graywalls (
talk)
18:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 10:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk) 10:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP is for multiple sources (at least two) of significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails GNG/ WP:NCORP. HighKing ++ 18:19, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
- Keep discussed in detail in more than one independent source Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 01:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 ( talk) 01:10, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 ( talk) 01:10, 21 October 2020 (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.