Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norwegian-Azerbaijanis Youth Organization (NAYO)

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. Fritzpoll (talk) 21:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian-Azerbaijanis Youth Organization (NAYO)

Norwegian-Azerbaijanis Youth Organization (NAYO) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This appears to be a non-notable organization; Google searches do not turn up anything. If any of our Norwegian editors can confirm notability, I will gladly withdraw the nomination. Pastor Theo (talk) 12:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as not notable. Jenuk1985 | Talk 13:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• I will provide the exact links. Now I can state, that the registration number in Norway is 991 986 758, registration address on Nygårds Alle 1, 0871 Oslo, Norway. Google provides information about it
  • http://www.internettopplysningen.no/firma/norwegian-azerbaijanis-youth-organization-nayo/ (norwegian search directory)
  • http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5984399851658670108 (video about presentation made by NAYO)
  • http://anspress.com/nid116521.html (news feed about concert that is organized by NAYO) -- Natura rerum (talk) 14:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I won't pass judgment on whether this article should be deleted, but in my opinion the sources Natura rerum provided above do not constitute reliable sources. Firstly, the Norwegian search directory link provided appears to be nothing more than a White Pages-style listing of an organisation. Secondly, the Google Video link is not independent of the subject, which contradicts WP:GROUP's guideline that to establish notability, it must be covered by reliable sources independent of the subject, something which a presentation by the group certainly is not. While the third source might be valid, WP:GROUP does say a company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources - I don't believe one news article is that significant. Anyway... let the debate continue! JulieSpaulding (talk) 14:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Extra comment - additionally, I'm starting to think that Natura most likely has a WP:COI here as their only edits have been to NAYO-related articles. JulieSpaulding (talk) 14:25, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is my first article and I edited only it, there is only one NAYO-related article Natura rerum (talk) 22:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it therefore makes you a single purpose editor LibStar (talk) 08:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

obviously. I need then quickly create my second article:) Natura rerum (talk) 15:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Very strong delete fails WP:ORG. the only hit on google is the wikipedia article! [1]. zero coverage in google news. I would put speedy spam delete. LibStar (talk) 16:12, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• The reason why this organization is not in google news or spread in secondary sources is due to the reason it is quite new and was registered recently. The links above showed its activity, below I can present you link about official registration from Brønnøysundregistene Register Centre, a government body under the Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry
  • http://w2.brreg.no/enhet/sok/detalj.jsp?orgnr=991986758 (registration number 991986758 included and description. Use google translator, english version not available)
  • http://phone.no/page/catalog/171027/53/ (entry in the phone directory with registration number
  • http://www.studentersamfundet.no/vis.php?ID=3389 (Event organized by NAYO and The Norwegian Student Union (Det Norske Studentsamfund) --Natura rerum (talk) 18:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why should we care that they have an entry in the phone directory? Punkmorten (talk) 20:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • just additional prove of true registration number Natura rerum (talk) 22:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment you say "The reason why this organization is not in google news or spread in secondary sources is due to the reason it is quite new and was registered recently." you've actually give an excellent reason why this article fails WP:N, WP:ORG and WP:GNG. the links you provide only prove the organisation's existence. just because it exists doesn't mean it automatically gets a wikipedia article. LibStar (talk) 08:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • • • Comment: Unfortunately, having a registration number by itself does not constitute notability. Happy editing! JulieSpaulding (talk) 03:34, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I'll rather merge it somewhere at this stage, but see for example mention in ANS Press. brandt 19:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, the Azeri community in Norway is insignificant, and the article has no real sources. Punkmorten (talk) 20:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. The question is not about significance or insignificance of some minorities, it is rude to say that there should be no pages relating to minor communities because their insignificance. And it is not pure ethnic, it is organization "for youth with an interest". All links show its existence, registration and activity. Natura rerum (talk) 22:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment — the concern is about Wikipedia's policy on notability. Basically, our policy says that subjects that have not received coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject are not verifiable or noteworthy, and so should be deleted.

  I'm sorry that this article falls foul of this rule, because it obviously means a lot to you, but the guidance here is clear.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 23:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Update I added many links with mentions about NAYO activity. Unfortunately not all of them are in English, use search tools inside them for key name or use google translator (turkish language is closest analogue). Also I made it more neutral by clean-up. Natura rerum (talk) 23:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - with respect, you've just given us an even stronger reason to delete this article. There are now 25 links on this article, falling foul of WP:NOTLINK and WP:SPAM. Additionally, most of those links are not independent of the source (i.e. many of them are just press releases). JulieSpaulding (talk) 04:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Does not even assert notability. I checked a couple of the references and found nothing to warrant an article. Johnuniq (talk) 03:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I tried looking for better sources, but it appears there aren't any. We can verify that it exists, but there is nothing notable about the organization. Rettetast (talk) 01:28, 4 June 2009 (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.