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.
From the recent Prod placed on this article by
Velella: "Non notable organisation. It has been tagged as requiring references for many months without anything forthcoming. Searches yield very little and nothing that speaks to notability. This appears to be a strangely reclusive think tank. Fails
WP:GNG. If the contribution history had been shorter, this would qualify for speedy deletion as a non notable organisation." Prod was subsequently removed by IP editor closely-associated with article subject. |Uncle Milty |
talk| 17:33, 27 June 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete - seriously unbalanced article without any significant independent sources. Neither political affiliations or leanings have been disclosed nor any examples of its work. It is possibly either a very small organisation trying to fit into larger shoes or an organisation trying to gain respectability from a presence on Wikipedia. All the significant editing has been done by editors with strong COI - almost certainly employees or agents of the organisation. Fails
WP:GNGVelellaVelella Talk 19:11, 27 June 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SoWhy 09:02, 5 July 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.