- 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 ( WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Tyree Scott Freedom School ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
De-PROD'd. Original PROD rationale: Although there are several cited sources, none of them are suitable indicators of notability per WP:NORG/ WP:GNG. None are substantially about the subject, and some (like the Seattle PI sources) don't even mention it. On a WP:BEFORE search, I found a few small articles from Seattle papers, but nothing from outside the region, meaning that the sourcing falls short of WP:AUD. It's likely that Tyree himself is notable, but the sourcing just isn't there for the school.
De-PROD'd by Grand'mere Eugene with this rationale: Article needs wokr, but sources are available, inclucing 2018 Seattle Times and 2006 Seattle Post Intelligencer pieces.
As my original PROD rationale mentioned, yes, Seattle-based sources do exist. But
WP:N and particularly for organizations
WP:AUD make it clear that local coverage alone does not suffice when it comes to supporting a claim of encyclopedic notability. There must be sufficiently significant attention by the world at large
– and how do we assess that that attention exists? Non-local sources, of which I found none. In the absence of sources that support a claim to notability, we cannot retain the article as a standalone. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)
10:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. When I de-PRODed this article, I listed
6 sources covering this subject on the article's talk page. Of these,
The Seattle Times has the largest circulation of any newspaper in the
Pacific Northwest region (almost 230,000 daily, 330,000 Sunday), and it has won 11
Pulitzer Prizes. It is second in circulation on the West Coast only to
The Los Angeles Times. It is definitely a regional paper. Since
WP:AUD specifies
at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary
, The Seattle Times easily meets this criterion, and its article is substantial. Regarding this article from the The Seattle P-I, The Seattle Times was the P-I's main regional competitor until the P-I became an online-only publication in 2009. The remaining 4 four sources I listed are indeed local, with the International Examiner serving mainly an Asian and pan-Asian audience, an important audience for this topic. I agree this article needs work, but since these sources do exist, and sinceNotability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article
, it should therefore be kept. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 18:53, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: I removed some copyvio and essay elements, and added content, then cn tags to content not yet found in sources. I may have time later this week to locate supporting referneces. — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 19:40, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:03, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jack Frost ( talk) 02:21, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 21:21, 2 July 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 ( WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Tyree Scott Freedom School ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
De-PROD'd. Original PROD rationale: Although there are several cited sources, none of them are suitable indicators of notability per WP:NORG/ WP:GNG. None are substantially about the subject, and some (like the Seattle PI sources) don't even mention it. On a WP:BEFORE search, I found a few small articles from Seattle papers, but nothing from outside the region, meaning that the sourcing falls short of WP:AUD. It's likely that Tyree himself is notable, but the sourcing just isn't there for the school.
De-PROD'd by Grand'mere Eugene with this rationale: Article needs wokr, but sources are available, inclucing 2018 Seattle Times and 2006 Seattle Post Intelligencer pieces.
As my original PROD rationale mentioned, yes, Seattle-based sources do exist. But
WP:N and particularly for organizations
WP:AUD make it clear that local coverage alone does not suffice when it comes to supporting a claim of encyclopedic notability. There must be sufficiently significant attention by the world at large
– and how do we assess that that attention exists? Non-local sources, of which I found none. In the absence of sources that support a claim to notability, we cannot retain the article as a standalone. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)
10:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 10:40, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. When I de-PRODed this article, I listed
6 sources covering this subject on the article's talk page. Of these,
The Seattle Times has the largest circulation of any newspaper in the
Pacific Northwest region (almost 230,000 daily, 330,000 Sunday), and it has won 11
Pulitzer Prizes. It is second in circulation on the West Coast only to
The Los Angeles Times. It is definitely a regional paper. Since
WP:AUD specifies
at least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary
, The Seattle Times easily meets this criterion, and its article is substantial. Regarding this article from the The Seattle P-I, The Seattle Times was the P-I's main regional competitor until the P-I became an online-only publication in 2009. The remaining 4 four sources I listed are indeed local, with the International Examiner serving mainly an Asian and pan-Asian audience, an important audience for this topic. I agree this article needs work, but since these sources do exist, and sinceNotability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article
, it should therefore be kept. Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 18:53, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: I removed some copyvio and essay elements, and added content, then cn tags to content not yet found in sources. I may have time later this week to locate supporting referneces. — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 19:40, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk) 02:03, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jack Frost ( talk) 02:21, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Grand'mere Eugene ( talk) 21:21, 2 July 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.