Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chr. Michelsen Institute


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 04:59, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Chr. Michelsen Institute

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No references-at-all!!! Especially in the field of social sciences and politics, this is an extremely unacceptable situation for an encyclopedia that wants to be taken serious (like Wikipedia)!! Corriebertus (talk) 12:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Science,  and Norway. ––FormalDude  (talk)  12:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment: the backlog of unreferenced articles dates, at present, to March 2007 and is over 131,000 articles. This is not an "extremely unacceptable" situation, it is an ongoing area of improvement that many editors are diligently working to improve. A Google search reveals a number of independent sources for this topic, which I will add momentarily, and is part of an editor's due diligence prior to nomination an article for deletion. I would familiarize yourself with WP:BEFORE prior to tagging more articles for AfD. Kazamzam (talk) 20:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WJ94 (talk) 12:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:57, 20 January 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lord Roem ~ (talk) 03:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, has an article in Great Norwegian encylopedia et al. 2A01:799:19A1:C100:55CA:6CAA:2785:4F4D (talk) 17:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I agree with the nom, these old unreffed articles are a black eye for the encyclopedia. Regardless, this appears to be a think-tank. I don't find significant coverage about them and the "Great Norwegian Encyclopedia" is at most a few lines. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 16:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete, no substantial coverage, even when using "Chr. Michelsens Institutt". Mooonswimmer 19:41, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete - Not enough coverage to meet GNG. The ⬡ Bestagon T / C 13:51, 28 January 2023 (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.