- 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. j⚛e decker talk 04:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons
- Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article lacks any WP:SECONDARY secondary sources that indicate that the Declaration has ever received any notice whatsoever other than from its draftees Fiachra10003 ( talk) 02:27, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. This is essentially a college summer project by a group (CHRIJ) at Boston College that is run by university students and faculty. Like most college projects (from any time of year), it hasn't achieved any true attention from any media outlet- other than the college's own newspaper. If the group itself had an entry I'd suggest redirecting there, but there doesn't seem to be such an entry and I'm unsure as to whether or not the CHRIJ would really qualify for one. It's a noble attempt (the declaration) at trying to solve a very pressing issue, but it hasn't received any coverage to speak of and fails notability guidelines. Of course there's also the issue that it reads like the CHRIJ is trying to use Wikipedia as a WP:SOAPBOX for their viewpoints, so even if there was coverage we'd likely still have to WP:TNT the article to remove all of the promotional and non-neutral viewpoints- but there isn't any, so delete. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:46, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete for lack of mention in secondary sources. (The soapboxing isn't the biggest problem here, as the article could easily be trimmed down to a few sentences.) QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 11:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:36, 14 August 2014 (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 delete. j⚛e decker talk 04:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons
- Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article lacks any WP:SECONDARY secondary sources that indicate that the Declaration has ever received any notice whatsoever other than from its draftees Fiachra10003 ( talk) 02:27, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. This is essentially a college summer project by a group (CHRIJ) at Boston College that is run by university students and faculty. Like most college projects (from any time of year), it hasn't achieved any true attention from any media outlet- other than the college's own newspaper. If the group itself had an entry I'd suggest redirecting there, but there doesn't seem to be such an entry and I'm unsure as to whether or not the CHRIJ would really qualify for one. It's a noble attempt (the declaration) at trying to solve a very pressing issue, but it hasn't received any coverage to speak of and fails notability guidelines. Of course there's also the issue that it reads like the CHRIJ is trying to use Wikipedia as a WP:SOAPBOX for their viewpoints, so even if there was coverage we'd likely still have to WP:TNT the article to remove all of the promotional and non-neutral viewpoints- but there isn't any, so delete. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:46, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete for lack of mention in secondary sources. (The soapboxing isn't the biggest problem here, as the article could easily be trimmed down to a few sentences.) QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 11:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:36, 14 August 2014 (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.