Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Childcare Trust


 * 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! 23:17, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

International Childcare Trust

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

Fails WP:ORG. Nothing in gnews, plain google search reveals directory listings. 3 of the 5 sources are its own website. LibStar (talk) 03:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:36, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timothytyy (talk) 03:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 08:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: The 2009 Guardian item probably isn't independent coverage either; it appears as part of material on and probably by the charity, which also featured in a later "International Development Journalism competition" there. However I have added a referenced link to ChildHope UK, a distinct organisation into which this charity eventually merged, which may make a merge/redirect a possible WP:ATD? AllyD (talk) 09:59, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: Originally a WP:SPA article describing this organisation's partner projects; some time later an IP added unsourced information / tributes to various individuals. I am not finding the independent coverage needed for WP:ORGDEPTH. As I half-suggested above, a redirect to ChildHope UK could be an option, though I feel any content merge could be WP:UNDUE and anyway would require to be based on WP:RS sources, which appear lacking. AllyD (talk) 07:53, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Unfortunately, this lacks significant coverage. Fails WP:SIGCOV. US-Verified (talk) 15:04, 7 March 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.