Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Awareness Against Human Trafficking (HAART)

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. (non-admin closure) Writing Enthusiast ^{(talk | contribs)} 23:29, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Awareness Against Human Trafficking (HAART)[edit]

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

There are issues with this article. I cannot see that it passes WP:GNG or WP:CORP as written and referenced. It is a good cause, of course it is, and good causes that are notable deserve articles. Ones where that is not established, however good the cause, may not have space here.

The references are imperfect at best. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS, but many of these are regurgitated press releases and PR pieces, or are directory entries. Additionally, some have been provided to reference topics in the article that are generic topics, unrelated to HAART except in a peripheral manner.

The article is also a WP:COATRACK for the topic of human trafficking per se. Even so, removal of that section alone will not save this article.

Despite our requiring references, it also suffers from WP:CITEKILL. An example is "get people informed about the issue.[2] [6][7] [4][8][9]". This is a practice to avoid even when the references are valid.

If genuine notability can be established then a rewrite based on references is required. If it cannot be established then it needs to go until such time that it is notable, and verifiably so. Fiddle Faddle 11:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are plenty of sources. Discussion about improving the article should be carried out at Talk:Awareness_Against_Human_Trafficking_(HAART). Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:48, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, good deal of source coverage and discussion of the subject matter and associated topic. — Cirt (talk) 03:50, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:08, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:36, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as above. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:44, 11 October 2014 (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.