Talk:London Friend

Creation & notability

I created this a separate article from a sub-section I had put as part of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality article, but, now, on second thought, have now created a separate article for London Friend because, as the article says, London Friend is a separate entity.

I hope that the material of the article, and also the resources linked to, establish the notability of this organisation.

I summarise the notability as follows:

• longevity: 35 years as a separate organisation
• having it's own premises for all or part of that time
• it's wide range of activities
• (and probably other things in linked resources)

I have added this information about notability because as I was creating the page a note came up saying that an article had been speedily deleted in 2007 because of notability not being established, but that if the present article had different content then I should continue (I continued because I was not aware of the content of the article deleted 3 years earlier and because I believe(d) that the present article established notability); and also a template questioning notability appeared as soon as I saved the article.

FrankSier (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The rationale for notability seems a strong one to me. There are plenty of reliable sources and the organization has had historical significant impact, being one of the earliest officially recognized LGBT social support organizations and has documented impact at a national as well as local level. Consequently I believe it meets the criteria of WP:GNG and the specific criteria of WP:ORG. Fæ (talk) 20:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Is it time to remove the template questioning the subject's notability? It was put there in 2011 as I understand it. As I created the article in the first place, maybe I am not the best person to judge. Looking at what I put about notability in 2011 I think it misses the point of WP's notability guidelines being about non-trivial mentions in independent reliable secondary sources, but I do think that these criteria have been met. FrankSier (talk) 20:58, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on London Friend. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100708231148/http://www.londonfriend.org.uk/history/ to http://www.londonfriend.org.uk/history/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314180337/http://www.londonfriend.org.uk/whatsnew/ to http://www.londonfriend.org.uk/whatsnew/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:24, 5 January 2018 (UTC)