Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centre for International Governance Innovation


 * 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. Per WP:NPASR. (non-admin closure) — UY Scuti Talk  20:39, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Centre for International Governance Innovation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A promotional article on a minor think-tank based on churnalism and other non-independent sources. All significant edits appear to be by employees, according to WP:COIN reports. Guy (Help!) 11:34, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:31, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Does appear to be mostly a promotional piece. Could we perhaps just tone it down a bit instead? Policydan (talk) 20:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:09, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:09, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Commenting only for now as I'm not sure what to say but I found several links with "Centre for International Governance Innovation CIGI Waterloo Ontario" at Books, News and Highbeam. SwisterTwister   talk  00:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete and redirect to Jim Balsillie. Curro2 (talk) 03:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - I won't say CIGI has an especially high profile internationally but it is far from being a bit-player or merely a vanity project for Jim Balsillie. CIGI has a reasonably high profile within Canadian media and its staff do comment regularly on current events: e.g.,, , so I would argue it easily meets the criteria for notability. On the text, I'll certainly concede the article reads now like a press release, but that's grounds for improvement, not deletion. --Saforrest (talk) 17:52, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - CIGI is notable, as the above user has stated (and as can be easily proven further), but the nominator is right, this article needs to be truncated. Would not be opposed to stubification. Jeremy112233 ( Lettuce-jibber-jabber? ) 02:16, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.