Talk:Warm Showers

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 27 December 2019 by reviewer MJL (talk · contribs).

Cycling

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cycling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cycling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CyclingWikipedia:WikiProject CyclingTemplate:WikiProject Cyclingcycling articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Contested deletion

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because Warmshowers.org already reached a certain level of fame, which exceeds the level of fame for hospitality networks with already existing Wikipedia articles. For instance, BeWelcome.org (alexa rank 507,989) with an already existing Wikipedia article BeWelcome has only half of the activity as can be measured on Warmshowers.org (alexa rank 184,760). --Geysirhead (talk) 15:32, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This organization is large enough to warrant a wiki page. Lcodyh803 (talk) 02:28, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IRS docs should be read

"Tahverlee Anglen (Corporate Cause Agency), management services
Seth Portner, former executive director
Lance Bickford, Chairperson
Chris Russo, former Director
Cyril Wendl, former Director
Russel Workman, former Director
Stephanie Verwys, Director
Jack Turner, Director
Bruce Squire, Director
Donna Price, Director
Rich Hoeg, Director
Lance Bickford, Director
Remi Laurant, Director" is all writen there.--Geysirhead (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen the IRS docs. They are not reliable 3rd party reporting or discussion establishing notability for any of these people. Unbh (talk) 15:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no more reliable source for tax information than the officially published IRS documents.--Geysirhead (talk) 13:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IRS as a source

The problem with the IRS sources is not their accuracy, but their use to establish notability. Information sourced only in there IRS and nowhere else is not notable enough to be included in this article.Unbh (talk) 02:53, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tax information of a notable organization is notable and IRS docs are the most reliable source of it.--Geysirhead (talk) 13:18, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tax information return is not inherently notable. without reliable secondary sources discussing these individuals this info does pass WP:ONUS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unbh (talk • contribs) 13:59, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LISTEN I wrote Tax information of a notable organization is notable not Tax information return is notable--Geysirhead (talk) 16:13, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Typo. But tax information declared to the IRS is not notable unless there's a secondary source starting it is Unbh (talk) 16:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

like wikipedia page about IRS stating that IRS actually exits--Geysirhead (talk) 16:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No. Not like that. Understood if the only source for the IRS was it's own page then it wouldn't be notable either.Unbh (talk) 16:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NNC There is no rule about notability of the content within the article. Notability applies to the page as a whole.--Geysirhead (talk) 19:28, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is simply not true in meaningful terms. The difference between noteworthy and notable is semantic. This information isn't either anyway, even if you had a good source for itUnbh (talk) 06:02, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]