Talk:The Gender Trust

Notability.

The page contains no evidence of the topic meeting WP:CORPDEPTH. Although members of the organization have been periodically quoted in the media, there is no significant coverage of the subject itself in any secondary sources.— James Cantor (talk) 16:56, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I see numerous instances of them commenting and testifying and Google Book hits, which denotes at least an interest in the group, hitting nearly 400 items. As well there are several dozen Google Scholar hits. This suggests that even if they haven't the resources to hire a publicist to promote themselves, they are nevertheless passed a Wikipedia threshold of notability. Insomesia (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Commenting and testifying are all well and good. But importance is different from notability. Notability would require a book or other source about them, not containing them. (Citations are relevant for WP:PROF, but not WP:ORG.) I don't know what to say about your belief about their ability to hire a publicist, or what that would mean for all the other WP pages about organizations.— James Cantor (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Simple. Some groups hire publicists to promote their ideas and work and ensure they maintain a level of public exposure. Many groups simply don't or fail to consider that an option. For a group that has been around so long and in the media so often I just don't see a heavy saturation of promotional anything suggesting they never have gone that route. Insomesia (talk) 18:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

By "I don't know what to say", I didn't mean that I did not understand the allusion you were trying to make. I meant it as a subtle indication that vague unsubstantiated allegations were inappropriate and that I was not going to take your bait and follow you on your tangent away from the article content. I will be more direct in the future.

Back to the issue: I have pointed out that there is no evidence of meeting any the criteria in the relevant notability guidelines, and your only response has been unrelated musing on your own part. "They would have greater notability if they had a publicist" is not a notability criterion on WP.

— James Cantor (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm convinced with how long they have have been around that they are likely the first or one of the first organizations of its kind, that alone denotes notability. For all I know they are still one of the few organizations of it's kind. Based on your prods of other easily-identified notable subjects I think your immediate track record has earned some skepticism. Insomesia (talk) 04:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

It is fine that you are convinced. But can you provide any WP-valid arguments?— James Cantor (talk) 05:43, 4 September 2012 (UTC)