Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Croatian Association of the Blind

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 keep‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian Association of the Blind (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)

I cannot find any reference to this except for the organisation's own website and Facebook / Twitter posts and some accounts of meetings of the organisation (for example the annual training event at https://vijesti.hrt.hr/hrvatska/hrvatski-savez-slijepih-11611855). There may of course be other references that I haven't found that would demonstrate notability (and might, incidentally, also enable the page to be deorphaned). Newhaven lad (talk) 16:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disability, Organizations, and Croatia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Did you search in Croatian? [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] SportingFlyer T·C 16:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep on the basis of the references found by SportingFlyer Here's another reference from the corresponding article in Croatian: https://web.archive.org/web/20181018161946/http://www.savez-slijepih.hr/hr/kategorija/o-savezu-2/ Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The sources from SportingFlyer contain multiple paragraphs of independent coverage which suitably allows this subject to meet the WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Let'srun (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I am happy to accept the consensus. However, I have checked all the sources found by SportingFlyer (and had found several of them before I suggested deletion). With one exception, they all contain very similar material that appears to have been provided to news outlets by the organisation itself about one of its events. The exception is material about a cultural organisation that is happy to take over space previously used by the Association. The source found by Eastmain appears to be a link to the Association website. None of this material appears to me to provide independent commentary about the organisation or its notability. (The presence of a couple of politicians at the event is not, I think, sufficiently remarkable). But happy to go with the consensus if others disagree with me. Newhaven lad (talk) 14:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That's not all of the articles, though - a very cursory search on Jutarnji shows four pages of search results dating back to at least 2006. There's plenty of information out there. SportingFlyer T·C 15:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Per SportingFlyer -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:49, 11 July 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.