Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XJW Friends

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:02, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

XJW Friends

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not meet WP:ORG. The only independent RS cited (the BBC article) doesn't even mention the organisation. My searches for alternative sources, including by the former name of “Free To Be Me” have not found anything better. SmartSE (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:01, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The co founders came up in my alerts this week. I haven't had time to assess but sources are notable and discuss leaving the Jehovahs Witnesses and setting up peer support groups here, the other was a magazine article which I don't know if it is online. I also had recent notifications which looked like conference listings so probably aren't notable. On the basis of these and the sources currently supporting the page, and the fact that notability isn't clear either way I vote keep for now. Mramoeba (talk) 08:25, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mramoeba: That link you provided is about Faith to Faithless not this organisation. It is also not an independent source. It does not provide evidence that this organiation meets WP:ORG. SmartSE (talk) 08:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I'm not seeing any reliable, independent sources that even cover this organization, let alone ones that cover it in substantial detail. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 08:11, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per TheTechnician27. Fails any notability guideline. Newshunter12 (talk) 08:48, 26 June 2019 (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.