Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foundation for Effective Governance

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.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 00:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation for Effective Governance

Procedural nomination (PROD, de-PROD, re-PROD). First PROD stated: "Unclear notability, written in overly promotional tone". De-PROD (by me) edit summary stated: "further reading section added with link to 'media about Foundation'; items here can be brought into this article to support notability as reliable sources". Second PROD stated: "notability". Second PROD permalink is also the version current at the time of nomination here at AfD. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral for now, tending towards delete - Some digging will need to be done to find more sources that aren't just reprints of press releases. So far, there is only one. If the article is left in its current state, it should be deleted. [1] at least gives a mention (but mentions aren't good enough). More sourcing is WP:HEY for keeping. Brilliantine (talk) 03:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - I added the initial PROD, and looking at the source that has been added, I can see the potential for keeping the article. But all substantial edits have come from the PR agency representing the organization, so I'm not optimistic that an independent editor will improve the article any time soon. --Mosmof (talk) 03:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep notability is established I think but I would like to see more independent sources. Richard Pinch (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:09, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I haven't seen any notable reporting which is actually about the Foundation rather than about the guy who founded it (mentioning it as his side line). That doesn't make WP:NOT in my view but obviously a consensus may disagree. --BozMo talk 20:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No notable mentions despite the recent addition of a link to a fawning article. A short description could be added to its founder's article if appropriate, but until there are sources that show notability for the English version of Wikipedia, there's no reason for it to exist. Flowanda | Talk 21:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. —User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Given that the Foundation has only been around for a year I think it isn't surprising that there is limited news coverage. The coverage that does exist though is enough IMO to establish notability. RMHED (talk) 20:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no references at all for anything it has done except receive donations. "currently is working on 3 projects..." can best be interpreted as "Has not yet done anything notable" DGG (talk) 02:19, 13 September 2008 (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.