Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Domain Name Rights Coalition

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. Sandstein 14:31, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Domain Name Rights Coalition

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Domain Name Rights Coalition (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

It exists, but there is very little little in-depth coverage uncovered in a WP:BEFORE search. Current sourcing is 2 primary sources, a government hearing transcript, and a short article in an industry publication which might be part of a pr campaign. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:12, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

I am the author of this article. I understand that there is minimal information in the article at present, but it is a starting point and with the passage of time I hope other edits are made to beef up the article. I do not believe this article merits deletion. I have no association, personally, with the Coalition but it has played a pivotal role, historically, in lobbying and advocating for the interests of individuals in domain name system policy. Its staff have testified before the US Congress, among other bodies, and its staff have also been quoted in respected publications like the New York Times.[1] And it is not a public facing organization, so it does not need/desire to engage in PR campaigns. I believe it is important to document on Wikipedia the different organizations, no matter how invisible they may sometimes be to the public, that are shaping public policy if they have resources and influence.Ferdeline (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

• Keep there are several issues at hand, the lack of independence of ICANN, Network Solutions and consumer choice, and the expanding range of TLD's that are occurring and unfolding as we write and consider. President George W. Bush did not do the world any favours by keeping control of the internet in the US of A. That was a feckless act. Keep, and strengthen the references. -- Whiteguru (talk) 12:27, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

• Keep: The only news source I found is from Domain Name Wire. It has found more coverage in the books, notably [1], [2], [3] and [4]. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 09:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
• Comment - the above sourcing appear to be either simple mentions, or primary sourcing.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Izno (talk) 01:32, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:10, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

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.