Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rainbow Collective

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 merge to Hannan Majid. Perhaps not strictly the consensus, but a reasonable middle ground which has attracted support from both sides of the argument. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:41, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbow Collective[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Small production company, doesn't pass WP:NORG. Sources 3,4,5,6 are self-sourced (and a listing at DIGNItex). Source 1 is a local source covering a documentary they made. Source 2 is about the founders, not the organization. In my BEFORE I was able to find other Rainbow collectives, but not much else on this organization. Icewhiz (talk) 12:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning keep. Multitude of cursory mentions, although the best I could find is this [1]. Seems affected by the same problem as most film companies; people gladly write about the films they produce but the company itself attracts little media interest. Still, they are featured in media from UK, Spain, Cambodia, etc., so definitely it's not your local convenience store or cleaning company. — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:33, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - There are cursory mentions, but the company must still meet WP:CORPDEPTH which the references fail to do. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep does have some reliable sources coverage of regional rather than local nature Atlantic306 (talk) 15:45, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
To he precise - there are only 2 possible RSes cited. East End Review is approx. 50% about the company. The South African is about two specific films and not about the compant at all - just mentioning it.Icewhiz (talk) 19:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpg jhp jm 01:27, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Entirely promotional and fails WP:SPIP, I cannot locate any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability. In response to the comment above, this article discusses the films and the film makers and provides no information at all on the company (the subject of this article) and since notability is not inherited, therefore fails WP:CORPDEPTH. The eastendreview reference appears to be an unreliable source. There is no "About Us" or equivalent on the website, no details about journalistic standards, etc, fails WP:RS. Topic therefore fails GNG and WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 16:24, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpg jhp jm 01:59, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think that the article is on a very authentic topic and qualifies wikipedia criteria for articles but need extra data and should be developed from this stub with proper reference,The topic is very relevant as it about DOCUMENTARIES on human and child rights issue wwhich can make very good impact on people in this growing world of media.Vinodbasker (talk) 17:35, 1 October 2018 (UTC)*[reply]
Perhaps - but notability is based on coverage, which in this feel good enterprise does not exist (and feel good enterprises generally get covered) - this is an extremely small company. Icewhiz (talk) 18:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: An option to consider is merge to Hannan Majid and redirect which I am happy to support. — kashmīrī ^TALK 06:01, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a redirect to Hannan Majid (whose notability is borderline, but meeting NDIRECTOR is easier than NCORP). The company itself is essentially a 2-man company (Majid and Richard York) - and was created as part of a walled garden around Majid. Icewhiz (talk) 08:04, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge & Redirect -- Hannan Majid is notable and this subject is strongly tied to him. --nafSadh ^{did say} 18:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. All options are currently on the table.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, wumbolo ^^^ 10:11, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect per HighKing and Nafsadh. Article as it stands is self-promotional and fails WP:GNG Flip^and Flopped ツ 00:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note I have no objection to a merge with Hannan Majid and delete. HighKing⁺⁺ 15:29, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge & Redirect to director Hannan Majid. The sources for the company article are very obscure and very thin, and are a subset of those for his biography. There really isn't any more to say about the company than what is already written about him. There are, however, a few additional pieces about him and his work that don't mention the company (or barely mention it) but could be used to expand his bio and cement his notability (they're referenced in his bio or in its further reading section). --Worldbruce (talk) 02:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with only a quick Googling I found 3 sources from The Guardian which each have significant coverage of the company. Also, 6 of their films have Wikipedia articles: Bafana (2006), AmaZulu: The Children of Heaven (2006), The Machinists (2010), Baghdad Holiday (2010), Tears in the Fabric (2014) and Mass E Bhat (2014). I have added various details and sources to the article and removed inappropriate YouTube and Google Calendar sources. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:59, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lopifalko: please provide sources that are in-depth and are on the company (and not products - films). As for the wiki articles on the films - they were all created by User:Tanbircdq (presently blocked, I've been reviewing the notability of their article creations) together on 1 Feburary 2015 as part of a Wikipedia:Walled garden around this article - which was created on the same date. As all articles were created by the same (indef blocked) user on the same date - their creation does not indicate notability. I will further note that meeting WP:NFILM is a much lower bar (due to the availability of movie reviews even for small film, and the guideline setting a lower bar) than meeting WP:NORG for a company. Icewhiz (talk) 07:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Icewhiz: Thank you for that additional info on the films. I thought that my sources did provide enough depth on the company; not a whole article on the subject, but not just a passing mention:

"This week, another UK event will focus on those left in poverty by Rana Plaza. Open Vizor, War on Want, Traid, and the Rainbow Collective will premiere a new documentary, Tears in the Fabric, to press more brands to pay up and sign the Bangladeshi safety accord. Film-maker Hannan Majid, of the Rainbow Collective, has spent years documenting the garment factories with co-director Richard York."
"One year on from the collapse of the Rana Plaza garment factory in Bangladesh, social justice campaigners and film-makers the Rainbow Collective with Raising for Rana are premiering Tears in the Fabric, a 30-minute documentary focusing on the struggles of one family in the aftermath of the disaster. An open screening on Thursday 24 April at 8.30pm at Regent's University"
"In partnership with Rainbow Collective, they have made a series of citizen journalist films with Cambodian garment workers that are well worth a watch." -Lopifalko (talk) 07:33, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those 3 guardian refs - you quote from above - are all passing mentions (two of them have other issues - one is a film screening event announcement, and the other is a product listing for Triad - both of which just mention Rainbow as the producer or being in cooperation with) - they clearly fail the significant requirement in WP:ORGCRIT. Icewhiz (talk) 07:37, 17 October 2018 (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.