Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Adult Volunteers

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 redirect to Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)#Youth. Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Young Adult Volunteers[edit]

Young Adult Volunteers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable per WP:NONPROFIT, unable to find significant independent coverage Deunanknute (talk) 14:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I was also not able to find independent coverage; merely a couple mentions in articles about former YAVs who had been hired for various jobs and the articles listed that amongst their past experiences. Probably notable within the Presbytarian Church community, but does not yet have the level of global notability required for a Wikipedia article.~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge -- This article seems to be largely based on the content of denominational website, givng news of their year-out programme for young adults. This says there have been 1250 participants in 20 years. I do not think that an average of 63 per year is enough to make it notable. It might however usefully be merged (as a short paragraph) to the WP page on the denomination. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 05:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA1000 15:45, 24 February 2015 (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.