Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comprehensive Rural Health Project

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:58, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comprehensive Rural Health Project

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This seems like a significant non-profit, but after deleting a speedy tag, I would like to confirm with other Wikipedians D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The organization may well be notable, but the article in its current state fails to establish notability. What is needed are at least two or more independent, reliable sources that discuss the organization in detail. The group's own website does not count, because it is not independent. Cullen328 (talk) 06:36, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 06:49, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CommentAdditional reference source has been added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Policy2012 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
CommentI would also like to highlight the fact that this organization is not for profit and has created a unique rurual health care model. Highlighting the benefits of this rural health care model is different from promoting a profit making firm. The wiki entry is especially useful in the current context of India's growth, as with growing economy and widening disparity rural health will gain increasing importance. Policy2012 —Preceding undated comment added 04:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

None of that matters. The only thing that matters is that some WP:Independent sources have taken notice of the organization. These sources do not have to be available online—books, newspapers, and other "dead tree" sources definitely count—but they must be independent of the organization. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not meet WP:N and lacks coverage in independent sources.--Sodabottle (talk) 05:24, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Adding information from Ramon Magsaysay Foundation website (considered the Nobel award equivalent for Asia). The website clearly mentions that the Comprehensive Rural Health Project has dome some path breaking work. I hope this source is "independent" enough. http://www.rmaf.org.ph/Awardees/Citation/CitationAroleMab.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Policy2012 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per the above-cited source, which makes it likely that other sourcing exists as well. But needs a rewrite and better sourcing. Sandstein 08:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.