Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Movement for a Just World


 * 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   keep. we appear to have sources, well no-one challenged them anyway Spartaz Humbug! 04:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

International Movement for a Just World

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not notable. Nat Miller (talk) 11:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep A NGO founded by the president of a country is certainly notable. The problem is probably a lack of sources in English. More information could be added with translation since it must have been covered in Malayasian newspapers. Better to keep as a stub for now rather than delete. Borock (talk) 12:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Malaysia does not have a president. The current Yang di-Pertuan Agong (head of state) is Mizan Zainal Abidin. The current Prime Minister (head of government) is Najib Tun Razak. --Nat Miller (talk) 12:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * My mistake. The article was talking about the president of the group, not the country. Then I would say delete for now until sources are found and (probably) translated. Borock (talk) 12:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not assert notability. --Quelle Jessen (talk) 10:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Has received significant and frequent coverage in reliable sources over a long time in both Malaysian and international media. Here are the non-payperview articles for enjoyment. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. Very poorly written, has no references, and not notable. --Werewolf Bar Mitzvah (talk) 13:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep sufficient coverage in gnews. LibStar (talk) 08:19, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per LibStar (don't say that very often!). Alzarian16 (talk) 03:49, 14 July 2010 (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.