Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egypt Vision 2030


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Vaticidalprophet (talk) 03:03, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Egypt Vision 2030

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Government guideline which does not meet WP:GNG- lacks coverage in independent sources. MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 05:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC) Withdrawn by nominator. MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 06:32, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 06:26, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete government press release  DGG ( talk ) 07:26, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Added a lot more non-government sources that talk about Egypt Vision 2030 (SDS Egypt). Ziad Rashad (talk) 16:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The additions were subsequently deleted by an administrator due to COPYVIO. Also note that the above user is the article's creator. MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 05:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Plenty of non-government sources, clear keep -- its a long-term plan, so clearly should be keep -- plenty of sources (probably even more in arabic, Sadads (talk) 20:46, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article shouldn't be deleted, but instead should be improved; probably like this other similar article Saudi Vision 2030. Ben5218 (talk) 23:28, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I agree with Ben, the article is in its very first stages as well. Also I'm wondering, when does this come to an end? I think the call for deletion was very unnecessary in the first place for such an important/independent topic. Ziad Rashad (talk) 03:55, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 22:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I generally give a bit more leeway on notability to government projects - while there aren't many English-language sources covering the topic, it's clearly notable. Elliot321 (talk &#124; contribs) 09:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep This plan has gained considerable attention from the foreign policy intelligentsia., (though the second source is admittedly weaker). BrxBrx(talk)(please reply with BrxBrx ) 18:39, 8 January 2021 (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.