Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fund for Adult Education


 * 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 merge‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Ford Foundation. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 (t • c) 03:13, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Fund for Adult Education

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

Sent to draft space multiple times and returned to article space without substantive changes. Seems to be borderline on notability. Let's have the community decide. UtherSRG (talk) 10:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 10:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge with Ford Foundation: Fails WP:GNG as a stand alone article 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:16, 10 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I am the original author of this article. I have now added more references to demonstrate notability. I would propose that this is notable apart from the Ford Foundation article because it operated semi-independently of the foundation (e.g., was not exclusively a grantmaking project) and there is specific news coverage of the activities of the FAE. Ef726 (talk) 14:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  12:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - I approved through AfC and then sent it back to mainspace after another editor sent back to draft. I included some of the many references about the organization which can be found on Newspapers.com through a WP:BEFORE search. There is not too much recent coverage as it is now defunct. I don't see an issue with it being merged to the Ford Foundation but based on the significant coverage it would need to covered somehow. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:09, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –&#8239;Joe (talk) 10:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge with Ford Foundation as per above. Out of all the cited sourced, only the article by Edelson and the article from Petersburg Times can be considered SIGCOV. other coverage that I found are either trivial mentions or covered as part of Ford Foundation's contribution to adult education. There does not seem to be enough coverage and content to justify a stand alone article. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.