Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for Appropriate Transport

Center for Appropriate Transport

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

fails WP:ORG. most of the coverage I found comes from the town it originates from LibStar (talk) 12:45, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:01, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Linking WP:ORG here for reference. More specific notability criteria for this non-profit are at WP:NONPROFIT. Valfontis (talk) 12:23, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. They definitely do not meet WP:NONPROFIT as their activities are limited to Oregon. LibStar (talk) 12:58, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. Clicking on the search using HighBeam turned up about 57 articles by the Eugene Register-Guard which possibly can be dismissed as local coverage (I didn't look carefully). However, it has two articles not so easily dismissed: Bike Repair Hits the Campus Streets from States News Service and Bike Shop Turns Into School by The Columbian which is specifically about the topic. —EncMstr (talk) 17:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Register-Guard I believe has the 2nd or 3rd largest circulation in the state, so "local" may be relative. Valfontis (talk) 01:25, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now at best as I also found some links at Books and News and also 46 of the Highbeam articles (with "Center for Appropriate Transport Eugene Oregon") but unless better can be found, there's perhaps simply not enough. SwisterTwister talk 21:16, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: Seems to be going through a rough patch because last time I looked its website was in need up updating, but notability is not temporary. Unfortunately I don't have more time to spend on the research but I suspect this 1992-founded organization is a victim of online recentism and the FUTON bias and that pre-Internet and archived sources are available. The program is indeed local in scope, however, it has received attention for its innovative program, including in a few national magazines and in a handful of (non-regional) books and scholarly articles, as well as having an article about it being picked up by Knight-Ridder. If one includes a search of Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL, a few more sources turn up in books and articles of a non-local nature. Valfontis (talk) 04:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]