Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Not for Sale (organization)

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.

Not for Sale (organization)

Not for Sale (organization) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sourcing to establish notability per

• Keep This is a relatively high profile organization. I.e. [1] 169.231.4.229 (talk) 03:51, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also [2]. Admittedly a little harder than usual to google for because "not for sale" is a common phrase (even a common slogan among similar organizations/campaigns dealing with human trafficking). 169.231.4.229 (talk) 04:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep A
  AFD is not clean up and a bit more time should have been taken in selecting which articles go to AFD. Mkdw^talk 19:33, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• This is not one of Neelix's articles in any case. It just happens to be in the field of human trafficking and he edited it once, but he's not the main author.169.231.54.192 (talk) 08:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 02:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 02:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to David Batstone (if that's kept) or simply delete as News, Books and Highbeam found some links but nothing convincingly better. SwisterTwister talk 08:22, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not only is it not notable, but the intent is clearly promotional. An attempt to include every organization supporting a good cause is not appropriate for an encycopedia --we're not a directory of charities and more than of anything else. DGG ( talk ) 07:22, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Passes
  WP:ORG. Huffington Post, U.S. News & World Report, LA Times, Forbes, Oakland Local, Mashable, Huffington Post again, Wall Street Journal on their coworking space, The Guardian... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:10, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Keep – Meets
  WP:ORGDEPTH per a review of sources posted above by Rhododendrites. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
  ]

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.