 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 2 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,151 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
Submission declined on 25 September 2024 by SafariScribe (talk).
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
This draft has been resubmitted and is currently awaiting re-review. |  |
| Submission declined on 8 September 2024 by DoubleGrazing (talk). This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: Declined by DoubleGrazing 4 months ago.
| |
Comment: The first two sources may or may not provide significant coverage of this organisation, but in any case they aren't quite enough to satisfy WP:ORG.The third is an archive, and as such a portal to sources rather than a source per se. It appears to contain a lot of unpublished material (minutes, correspondence, etc.) which would not be acceptable as sources. There may be acceptable contents in it, but the way the citation is made (to the archive as a whole, rather than to any specific material therein) makes it impossible to verify this as I wouldn't know what I should be looking for. The author should point precisely to specific sources within the archive, whether wishing to use them to verify information in this draft and/or to establish notability. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Legacy of Equality, Leadership, and Organizing | |
| Formation | 1973 |
|---|---|
| Location | |
Key people |
|
| Website | lelo |
Formerly called | Northwest Labor and Employment Law Office |
Northwest LELO is an American labor organization founded by Black construction workers, Asian and Alaska Native cannery workers, and Latine farmworkers to fight racial discrimination in the workplace and in unions. LELO's tactics originally were centered around lawsuits but in the late 1980's became more focused on grassroots community organizing.[1][2][3]
- ^ McCann, Michael W.; Lovell, George I. (2020). "Chapter 4: LELO, ACWA, and the Politics of Civil Rights Mobilization". Union by law: Filipino American labor activists, rights radicalism, and racial capitalism. Chicago series in law and society. Chicago London: University of Chicago Press. p. 225-271. ISBN 978-0-226-67990-7.
- ^ Johnson, Diana K. (2023). "Chapter 8: From Seattle to Mozambique: The Northwest Labor and Employment Law Office and Challenges to the New Right". Seattle in coalition: multiracial alliances, labor politics, and transnational activism in the Pacific Northwest, 1970-1999. Justice, power, and politics. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. p. 153-171. ISBN 978-1-4696-7279-3.
- ^ "Northwest Labor and Employment and Law Office (LELO) records - Archives West". archiveswest.orbiscascade.org. Retrieved 2024-09-09.
- in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
- reliable
- secondary
- strictly independent of the subject
Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.