Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute for the Analysis of Global Security

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 delete. Sandstein 18:22, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Institute for the Analysis of Global Security

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

This article has been tagged as lacking independent sources for nearly 8 years now, and none have been added. Google turns up some namechecks, but I didn't see any sources about this group. Guy (Help!) 19:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, to enlight the talk, the groups publish a good deal of articles, including in major news papers.

Note : I created the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security article in 2009 since it appeared multiple times in my sources while writing the article Africa–China economic relations. I have no special acquaintance with the institute, and don't know its popularity. I also think it's rather good to have article on "think tanks" and academic sources, so we can know WHO they are, which side they are, and take what they write more carefully. Yug (talk) 15:04, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I just sent them the following email. Yug (talk) 15:26, 2 April 2017 (UTC) :[reply]

@: info@iags.org : IAGS's wikipedia article under review Dear IAGS, The Wikipedian community is reviewing your Wikipedia article[1] and weighting it's viability on Wikipedia. The community is mainly looking to evaluate the global reputation of your Institute. You can support the "Keep" position for your article by doing the following : - Go on the ongoing deletion talk[2] - Share with us links to external and neutral sources who introduce the IAGS, - (Share links to documents introducing the IAGS, but your own writing presenting conflict of interest, will have less credibility to evaluate global reputation) - Please, when editing the page[1] or posting a message on the ongoing talk[2], remember point out what is your relations with the IAGS. Also, as a general and long term note, we encourage you to publish more content under Creative Commons Licences, so it spread more efficiently online, and can be reused more easily by Wikipedia. This license is especially suitable for your About page[3]. Best regards, [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_the_Analysis_of_Global_Security [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Institute_for_the_Analysis_of_Global_Security [3]: http://www.iags.org/about.htm -- Yug

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The log of April 1 is overfilled
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 00:10, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It exists, and its works/people are cited in some news/book/scholar sources, but nothing suggests it is notable in itself. Our criteria for NGO notability are not good, but I'd be ok with as much as a single sentence discussing its importance, significance, etc. In lieu of that, well, we are not WP:YELLOWPAGES... --Hanyangprofessor2 (talk) 05:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:51, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:51, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:33, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is an absence of substantive coverage here. Vanamonde (talk) 05:59, 11 April 2017 (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.