Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Potters For Peace

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Potters For Peace (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ORG. Source 3, 10 and 13 are dead. In any case, sources 10 to 15 are about Ceramic Water Purifiers and not this organization, so it's a content fork. LibStar (talk) 00:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I don't have time to fix the article myself right now, but a Google Scholar search shows up lots of articles about the group. Some discuss the group itself while many are about the technical quality of their water filters.
  • Rarick, Charles A. and Duchatelet, Martine, Potters for Peace: Building Social Entrepreneurs One Piece at a Time (2006). Journal of the International Academy of Case Studies, 4(1)2006, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2491964
  • Carpenter, B. S. (2010). Embodied Social Justice: Water Filter Workshops as Public Pedagogy. In Handbook of Public Pedagogy: Education and Learning beyond Schooling (pp. 337-340). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203863688-52
  • Kowalski, K. (2008). Removal of virus-sized particles and escherichia coli by the potters for peace ceramic water filter (Order No. 1460862). Available from ProQuest One Academic. (288219160). Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/removal-virus-sized-particles-escherichia-coli/docview/288219160/se-2
Lijil (talk) 08:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 00:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:24, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Sources don't have to be available online to be valid. In this case, the references that appear to be dead may be available through The Wikipedia Library or a university library. I think that the references establish notability. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 02:05, 23 February 2024 (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.