Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rewriting Extinction

Rewriting Extinction (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I see no evidence this passes WP:NORG. Paradoctor (talk) 15:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Paradoctor (talk) 15:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep - The "Primary Criteria" section in WP:NORG states "presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject."

  Multiple references on the page pass this criteria (BBC Video, Guardian, The Sunday Times). Other reputable sources not mentioned on the Rewriting Extinction page (ITV, The Independent) have featured Rewriting Earth (and formerly Rewriting Extinction) and their campaigns.

  In the Guardian article and BBC video, Rewriting Extinction is the subject of the piece.

  As per the Guardian: "Rewriting extinction: Ricky Gervais joins celebrities creating comics to save species", "Ricky Gervais is the latest celebrity to join an ambitious year-long storytelling campaign called Rewriting Extinction with the launch of a comic called Bullfight." The remainder of the article is a feature on Rewriting Extinction, in the form of an interview with its founder, Paul Goodenough. PersonDoingSomeEditing (talk) 16:11, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:NORG. A google search brought only blogs or websites that talk about the comics they have published. TNM101 (chat) 16:03, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The organization has changed its name to Rewriting Earth, but is still active. The obvious connection to renowned environmental activists, celebrities and important comic artists lends relevance. The article should be expanded to include current campaigns that have been reported on by the BBC, for example. It can be assumed that further campaigns will follow, as regular work appears to be taking place. Lavendelboy (chat) 09:48, 17 January 2025 (CET)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:06, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep As shown by PersonDoingSomeEditing, subject has enough reputable and independent coverage (at least 3 sources) to be considered notable. Silvymaro (talk) 21:44, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Hoping to get the views of experienced editors more familiar with our guidelines.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:02, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep The BBC video and Guardian sources are the only ones that unambiguously meet WP:NORG (significant, independent, reliable, secondary). Other sources have problems with not having significant enough coverage or being from a consensus reliable source. That said, it does meet the criteria if just barely. Personally I would like to see more instances of significant coverage before an unqualified keep vote. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 15:03, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]