Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OpenMedia.ca

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 no consensus. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:45, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OpenMedia.ca[edit]

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

The article fails to establish notability, and also reads like a brochure rather than a neutral encyclopedia article. Ironic since they advocate for net neutrality. Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page is its in infancy. Can we please give time for people to rewrite it properly. OpenMedia.ca has a huge significance in Canada, just check out Google News. I'm still in the process of gathering sources to write meaningful text. Again, just check out Google News if you are looking for notability. --FineWolf (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As for reading like a brochure... I only see facts backed by news articles from major national media sources (CBC, Montreal Gazette, etc.). I don't see a brochure. --FineWolf (talk) 18:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FineWolf has few edits not related to this article, and none since 19 August 2010

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It is now four days since FineWolf wrote "Can we please give time for people to rewrite it properly", and no attempt at all has been made to improve the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unambiguously promotional article, telling us that they "engage, educate and empower", that they have "spearheaded" campaigns, and taht tehy are "the force behind" an "initiative" "which celebrates innovative and independent media". JamesBWatson (talk) 09:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Promotional verbiage notwithstanding, the organization meets notability guidelines by way of coverage by the CBC, the Montreal Gazette and 24Hours. PK T(alk) 15:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2011 (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.