Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eating Disorders Association

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. W.marsh 19:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eating Disorders Association

Eating Disorders Association (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete this stub which reads like a phone listing/advertisement. Notability is in no way indicated. Doczilla 02:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. Wpnot. --Victor falk 10:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletions. -- --Rrburke(talk) 13:51, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - WP:NOT Onnaghar talk.review 16:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletions. —Espresso Addict 18:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. —Signed by KoЯnfan71 My Talk Sign Here! 00:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. National charity established in 1989 from two older charities. Although the turnover is relatively small (around 0.8 million pounds in last financial year), the charity runs conferences and awards, as well as a website which claims 3.3 million hits just in March 2007. The charity also claims to have been covered significantly in national press and television eg Tonight programme, BBC Politics Show, Hello! magazine etc (see annual review 2006-7 pdf, linked: [1]), although an independent source would obviously be useful. Assuming confirmation of this coverage can be found (I will try to look some out), it would seem to meet WP:ORG for a charitable organisation, which states "[Non-commercial] Organizations are usually notable if the scope of activities are national or international in scale and information can be verified by sources that are reliable and independent of the organization." Espresso Addict 15:52, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Some sources from a very quick Google search (some are short mentions, but the bulk & breadth seems adequate): UK charity awards 2007 runner up: [2]; national television/radio: Channel 4 news [3], BBC Radio Women's Hour [4], Friction.TV [5]; national newspapers: Independent [6][7], Daily Mail [8][9], Telegraph [10] & 5 more hits, Guardian [11], Times [12], New Statesman [13], UK government sites showing lobbying role etc [14], [15], [16], MP on the relaunch [17], local newspaper story mentioning support by Kate Winslet & Kiera Knightley: [18] etc etc. Espresso Addict 16:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Keep Good work espresso addict. Keep on. But the article really looks bad, and first looks last. I shouldn't have missed the "member of NHS Direct Online" link the first time I looked at the page. Maybe I neep a cup myself to keep my eyes open.--Victor falk 16:16, 12 October 2007 (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.