Talk:Legal Impact for Chickens

AFC: Notability

This page has been rejected on lack of notability grounds before. I believe there are now more than sufficient grounds to declare Legal Impact of Chickens notable for its own page. I would appreciate any guidance if the following rationale would not meet these requirements, and any feedback in general.

As per WP:GNG and in particular WP:ORGCRIT, any company is notable if it meets the following criteria: Presumed, significant coverage, reliable, secondary sources, and independent of subject.

Where "Presumed" is met by default in the absence of a counter, the other four criteria I see as met with each of these these five examples cited in the article:

1. Want to help animals? Here’s where to donate your money. Vox - This is a reliable, independent, secondary source. I would think it is in depth enough too: the article lists the charities that have been selected by Animal Charity Evaluators (ACE) as one of its recommended charities in 2024. As part of the listing three lines of detail describe LIC. (see more detail below *)
2. Announcing Our 2023 Charity Recommendations ACE - This follows a similar pattern, announcing 6 charities as recommended in 2023, and is from the charity evaluator itself. This a secondary, independent, in depth source, which I believe to be reliable.
3. Charity Review: Legal Impact for Chickens ACE - This is the actual report by ACE on LIC. This is independent and very in depth. I believe this is a reliable source, and because this is about LIC, it could be argued to be secondary - though I appreciate others may say this is original research too. Your thoughts are appreciated.
4. The "Costco shareholder derivative suit" has been widely reported on. LIC is mentioned directly and as the representatives of the claiming shareholder, the filing of the suit and its allegations can be seen as LIC's and add to their notability. From what I can tell at least two sources are reliable, independent, secondary, and in-depth when looked at it this way: The Independent and CBSNews. Note there are at least another dozen such stories reported by other news agents.
5. Crescent City-based farm company accused of animal cruelty sued by animal rights group Times Standard - This is certainly independent, secondary, and in-depth by mentioning LIC 3 times. I understand it to be reliable as well based on Ground news's assessment.

(*) In case the paywall of the Vox article is the issue, here are the relevant excerpts:

"If you care about animals and want to reduce their suffering, but aren’t sure exactly how, Animal Charity Evaluators (ACE) is an organization that might be able to help.

The California-based nonprofit puts out an annual guide for recommended animal charities, and it just released its list for this year."

[...]

"8) Legal Impact for Chickens: This group works to enforce laws against animal cruelty in the US, filing lawsuits for farmed animals and suing companies that violate commitments to animal welfare. The overall strategy is to make it a liability to treat animals cruelly on factory farms. The first lawsuit, in 2022, tackled Costco’s executives and the company’s treatment of chickens."

Sklabb (talk) 15:35, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

This draft is definitely a good start! It might help readers (and address the notability concerns of reviewers) if the article highlighted coverage the LIC cases have received from major (presumed impartial) media outlets. The CBS News coverage of the Costco case is one example. Also, maybe not mentioned in the article, there's coverage of the Case Farms litigation in the Carolina Journal. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 15:41, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Sdsds!

I've added your suggestions: the explicit mention of media coverage which makes sense to cover anyway, and added the extra suggested link. Sklabb (talk) 10:45, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Comments left by AfC reviewers

• Comment: Notability is debatable per WP:NCORP, but either way this draft is too promotionally worded to become an article. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:01, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: To AFC reviewers: Notability rationale can be found on the talk page if needed.-- Sklabb (talk) 16:23, 30 August 2025 (UTC)