Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A T.I.M.E.

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:47, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A T.I.M.E.[edit]

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

This apparently worthy organization has not gotten any significant coverage in reliable sources. The reliable sources that have mentioned it appear to have done so only in passing. It has been tagged for references and notability for a sufficient amount of time so that expansion and/or further referencing appears unlikely. ^Bongo_matic 03:08, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- (X! · talk) · @250 · 04:59, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. -- (X! · talk) · @251 · 05:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While I have a bias because I created this article, I feel it is noteworthy. (My informal test is that if Tefillin Barbie has an article, ATIME should as well.) As to the quality of the article, I took it as far as I could with my knowledge and would much appriciate if someone (maybe s/o in the USA where they are better known) could improve it. Joe407 (talk) 09:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The nomination is not based on the quality of the article as it is, but rather on the seeming non-existence on significant third-party coverage of the organization. The articles currently cited are on other, related topics and mention the organization only in passing. Article quality can be improved, but absent significant third-party coverage, the article does not merit inclusion. ^Bongo_matic 13:31, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good point. While I'm sure that most of Jewish America has heard of the org, for whatever reason they do not get alot of press. Therefore Bongo is correct and according to WP:V, the article should go. It seems that the best case to be made for a keep is WP:NOTLAW. Thoughts? Joe407 (talk) 05:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Press coverage is not the only factor in establishing notability. If you do a Google search correctly you come up with some 15,000 results of websites linking to ATIME and making note of their services, and some are very prominent organizations as I point out below. Shlomke (talk) 05:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable organization, and it has received press coverage as referenced in the article. Articles about them frequently appear in The Jewish Press family section for example. Shlomke (talk) 14:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide examples. ^Bongo_matic 14:31, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A TIME To Celebrate, A Personal Story from A TIME's Shaarei Tikah - Shlomke (talk) 06:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of these is news coverage, nor provides significant coverage at all. One is a letter to the organization, not coverage. The second contains passing mention of the organization only. ^Bongo_matic 08:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it depends how you define "news coverage". In any case, these (and the other) links do show that the org. is notable IMO. Doing a Google search for ATIME + fertility brings some 15,000 results. I've gone through the first hundred and nearly all are websites linking to this org. for fertility advice and services (or awards received from them). Among them are some very prominent ones: NYU [1], PBS [2]], Hebrew Union College [3], Mount Sinai Medical Center [[4]] and Yeshiva University [5]. Shlomke (talk) 05:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: notable organization. - Ret.Prof (talk) 22:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WP:OTHERSTUFF as Joe407 says. If Tefillin Barbie can withstand deletion, then so can this. I've never heard of this organization. 15 000ghits is not really that significant these days, perhaps one would expect much more for a multinatinal organization. Similar 'industry' Puah Institute is much larger and widely know. I'm not sure about ATIME. --Shuki (talk) 22:49, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Shuki, in the USA A TIME has become very well known, so it's not Israeli based.

To the best of my knowledge, ATIME is not an international organization. They are based in NYC and offer services in major Jewish centers in the USA. In terms of international operations and visibility, they at most may offer services in Canada. Joe407 (talk) 10:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable organization in the American Jewish Orthodox community. IZAK (talk) 08:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IZAK - The challenge is demonstrating WP:V. Joe407 (talk) 10:43, 18 December 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.