Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holistic Management International (2nd nomination)

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. In this case, no consensus between Keep and Merge, which is an editorial issue. Black Kite (talk) 18:16, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Holistic Management International

edit
AfDs for this article:
Holistic Management International (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This was deleted at AFD1 but taken to DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2013_April_12. The outcome of the DRV is to relist the discussion to evaluate the sources that were added to the article later on and not commented on. As DRV close I am neutral. Spartaz Humbug! 05:48, 20 April 2013 (UTC) Spartaz Humbug! 05:48, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep - I previously 'voted' delete. However, my understanding of WP:NONPROFIT is that charitable organisations of national or international scope need their activities to be verifiable in independent sources. There are several independent sources (for example Source 1) which give a reasonable overview of HMI and its activities and could be used to build a useful Wikipedia article. HMI is clearly or international scope. However, many of the sources are worthless, listings on Start2Farm.gov and primary sources written by Allan Savory or linked directly to HMI. These need to be replaced. There's been a bit of desparate addition of these sort of sources to try and prove HMI is more notable than it really is. But I believe this is now a clean-up issue, rather than reason for deletion. Sionk (talk) 10:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - My opinion hasn't changed from before. It is only just notable, but I think the GNG is met. SmartSE (talk) 10:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Weak keep - I said my piece at the DRV and have agreed to help the original author fix the article. Stalwart111 11:41, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Having now had a chance to do some clean-up and have a proper look through some of the sources, I've found quite a few that cover the organisation's work in some detail - books, magazines, etc. I'm fairly convinced the subject passes WP:GNG, even though the independent sources are hard to find among the non-independent ones published by those linked to the subject. So changed my note. Stalwart111 03:48, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep/merge Over its 28 year history under three different names it has amassed a large number of news articles mentioning it. On the whole these articles are as much about the technique Holistic Management as the organisation. I be happy with a merge into Holistic Management.--Salix (talk): 17:13, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete/merge — HMI has lots of passing mentions and less in-depth coverage than I'd expect from such a longstanding company. Most of what it's done and gotten coverage for can be presented in the Allan Savory article. There's a serious problem with relating the term "holistic management" to this subject, or even to holistic management, as many, many sources use it in an unrelated way (see talk). Though the relationship with Savory has apparently ended, I've found no substantial coverage of HMI alone since that rift (especially by a totally unrelated party, having neither to do with Savory and his wife Jody Butterfield nor purse strings and PR). The tendency to WP:BOMBARD and sometimes outright WP:FAKE it can't make up for the fact that as far as 28-year-old international nonprofits go, this one isn't very notable at all. Parsing and aggregating mentions of corporate reincarnations is likewise unhelpful. The original deletion was proper. JFHJr (㊟) 17:37, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge to Savory,, not to Holistic management. Holistic management is a very general term--most of the available references refer to it in different senses than this--some fairly closely related, others not. It's a vogue word meaning trying to take the natural or human environment into account, & I think almost meaningless. That Savory chooses to use it for his theories is reasonable enough, but doesn't give him a trademark on it--it is undue emphasis to make it appear as if he coined the phrase in general. A possible redirect would be Holistic management in agriculture--which again could mean other things that Savory's methods, but at present seems to be used mainly for them. DGG ( talk ) 06:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. czar · · 03:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 16:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Cleanup is needed here, not deletion.Transcendence (talk) 19:52, 8 May 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Holistic_Management_International_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1137913576"