Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Investopia

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:35, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Investopia

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Investopia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

There is nothing to indicate that the subject is notable. This is a UAE government program created in 2021. There is no independent reliable news coverage of this program. The coverage is solely by news outlets that are propaganda outlets for the UAE government or are prohibited from reporting in any critical or nuanced way on this government program. Thenightaway (talk) 15:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and United Arab Emirates. Shellwood (talk) 15:41, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep and improve - Based on global reach and influence as well as participation by notable individuals. Se7enNationArmy2024 (talk) 17:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• • What about this program that has existed since 2021 indicates that it has "global reach" and "influence"? There is certainly nothing in this article, which is written like an advertisement, that suggests any such thing. If it's so influential and has such global reach, where is the RS coverage on this organization? Paying notable people to give a speech at a conference does not make the conference notable. Thenightaway (talk) 19:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:37, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep enough sources to meet GNG and SIGCOV. Many might not be traditional big name western "reliable sources", but that has never been a requirement. A global encyclopedia benefits from this type of article and these types of sources. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:26, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Multiple reliable, independent sources cover Investopia beyond the organization’s site such as (WAM), (Ministry of Economy), and (Deutsche Bank). Meets GNG and SIGCOV. Yolandagonzales (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Those sources are neither reliable nor independent of the subject. Thenightaway (talk) 16:50, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I agree with Nominator that I don't see independent, reliable sources to pass WP:GNG. The online sources I found read more like press releases than independent coverage: Economy Middle East, One Arabia, Aletihad. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 06:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - this is not notable, and some searches are coming up as false positives for the notable Investopedia. Bearian (talk) 02:03, 9 July 2025 (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.