Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manna haven

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 of the debate was consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 12:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Manna haven

This article was originally called an advertisement, but I think it is basically an advertisement for a very local, minor event. Hence, AfD. Nazgjunk - - Signing is ^{for Whimps} 13:10, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

• This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:50, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

• Manna Haven is a not for profit event attended by hundreds of people every week and over the last year has had thousands of people come through. Many of these people want to know more about the event, why it occurs etc. -Primary Author Kingyj 20:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

• I agree that it reads like an advert. It doesn't matter that it's not for profit. If it is a recurring event please wikify this article - list its goals, makeup, significance, etc in an organized fashion. Make it encyclopaedic.

Joomba 23:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: Relisting for lacking votes. Johnleemk | Talk 13:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, One non-wiki link on Google -- and it's for the organization website. I am sorry, Kingyj, but this just isn't verifiable outside of the organization URL. HackJandy 22:21, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

• OK will try and 'wikify' and organise the article soon. I still do not get why people would want to remove a small article about a non profit organisation ? The name is not taken and is not causing anyone trouble. Its an article about a non-profit organisation that does a number of things for the community, including providinng a free meal every week to 300-400 people in need. One of the reasons why there are not links to this website from others is because the website hasn't been up for that long. Thx Kingyj 20:16, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. People might feel that either a) there is no independent source to verify the article, or b) there subject is jus tnot big/important enough to be included in an article. —the preceding unsigned comment is by The Land (talk • contribs)

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.