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.
A
WP:MILL type self-proclaimed think tank having near about no substantial research output or any encyclopedic value. In other words, this article is a straightaway PR/Advertising
WP:PROMO. Fails to pass
WP:GNG and
WP:NCORP by all means. Hence, calling for an AfD discussion.
Hatchens (
talk)
02:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: The creator of this article is
User:Randfiskin is also involved in launching (trying to work up on) non-notable wiki pages in a very short period,
V-NOVA,
Vogue Institute of Art & Design and
Draft:Vibhav Kant Upadhyay which have been earlier either deleted or moved to draft space for various reasons. Though the ID itself was made in 2017, it went active on July 1, 2020, by performing its first edit at
Juli Berwald's page. As per my basic understanding, this ID is probably involved in "Paid Edits/
WP:PAID" without disclosure. Kindly note, due diligence is required. -
Hatchens (
talk)
02:57, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: All the claims are baseless and there is no evidence of paid. Note this account is created in March 2020 and the user is only interested to deleting the articles no matter whether it is notable or not you may check the
history.
Comment: @
Randfiskin, your allegation is duly accepted. If an article passes the AfD on its merit, then well and good. If not, then it gets deleted as per the consensus. That's why I have initiated this AfD discussion. Let everyone chip in and let the sanity prevail. -
Hatchens (
talk)
05:56, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep The organization has enough citations that are from reliable resources and independent of the subject. Most of the coverage is significant from reliable resources and passes
WP:RS. It also works closely with Government. The organization is internationally acclaimed worked with
United Nations and many notable International organizations such as
UNESCO,
UNICEF,
Google,
Facebook. clearly passes
WP:GNG.
Randfiskin (
talk)
05:48, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: Of course, as a creator, you have the right to put whatever you like. It's a Free world. The comment which I have added are for those who will chip in their views. It is not meant to stop you but to notify others. -
Hatchens (
talk)
06:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom: vanity page maintained by WP:MILL and passing mentions. I'm also unbolding the extraneity above, which makes it appear that far more of importance is being discussed than actually is.
——Serial10:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
On the fence - It does have the hallmarks of paid/promotional editing, but when I do my own search I do find some material. The thing is, I don't have a great sense of reliability of these sources, so could probably be convinced either way. Here's some of what I see, though:
meritalk overview, some coverage of a program it did in partnership with Facebook in
News18 here and
here, articles on
zeenews.india.com,
higher education digest,
express computer about some project with Google... there are some others... — Rhododendritestalk \\
02:43, 8 August 2020 (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.
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.
A
WP:MILL type self-proclaimed think tank having near about no substantial research output or any encyclopedic value. In other words, this article is a straightaway PR/Advertising
WP:PROMO. Fails to pass
WP:GNG and
WP:NCORP by all means. Hence, calling for an AfD discussion.
Hatchens (
talk)
02:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: The creator of this article is
User:Randfiskin is also involved in launching (trying to work up on) non-notable wiki pages in a very short period,
V-NOVA,
Vogue Institute of Art & Design and
Draft:Vibhav Kant Upadhyay which have been earlier either deleted or moved to draft space for various reasons. Though the ID itself was made in 2017, it went active on July 1, 2020, by performing its first edit at
Juli Berwald's page. As per my basic understanding, this ID is probably involved in "Paid Edits/
WP:PAID" without disclosure. Kindly note, due diligence is required. -
Hatchens (
talk)
02:57, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: All the claims are baseless and there is no evidence of paid. Note this account is created in March 2020 and the user is only interested to deleting the articles no matter whether it is notable or not you may check the
history.
Comment: @
Randfiskin, your allegation is duly accepted. If an article passes the AfD on its merit, then well and good. If not, then it gets deleted as per the consensus. That's why I have initiated this AfD discussion. Let everyone chip in and let the sanity prevail. -
Hatchens (
talk)
05:56, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep The organization has enough citations that are from reliable resources and independent of the subject. Most of the coverage is significant from reliable resources and passes
WP:RS. It also works closely with Government. The organization is internationally acclaimed worked with
United Nations and many notable International organizations such as
UNESCO,
UNICEF,
Google,
Facebook. clearly passes
WP:GNG.
Randfiskin (
talk)
05:48, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: Of course, as a creator, you have the right to put whatever you like. It's a Free world. The comment which I have added are for those who will chip in their views. It is not meant to stop you but to notify others. -
Hatchens (
talk)
06:22, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom: vanity page maintained by WP:MILL and passing mentions. I'm also unbolding the extraneity above, which makes it appear that far more of importance is being discussed than actually is.
——Serial10:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)reply
On the fence - It does have the hallmarks of paid/promotional editing, but when I do my own search I do find some material. The thing is, I don't have a great sense of reliability of these sources, so could probably be convinced either way. Here's some of what I see, though:
meritalk overview, some coverage of a program it did in partnership with Facebook in
News18 here and
here, articles on
zeenews.india.com,
higher education digest,
express computer about some project with Google... there are some others... — Rhododendritestalk \\
02:43, 8 August 2020 (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.