Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Project Management Association


 * 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. I have ignored most of the SPA !votes, which were not policy based and basically argued WP:ILIKEIT. Randykitty (talk) 11:18, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

International Project Management Association

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional with borderline notability at best. Conceivably notable, though there is no evidence for that other than inclusion in a list of organisations. Until recently it was an inconspicuous factual article that  might never have been noticed, but now  expanded 500%  into a absurdly over-detailed promotional press release. If there is any actual source for notability, it could of course be trimmed back and protected against the addition of such material. . (A listing in the infobox such as the present  Employees: 51-200 is a sure sign of being taken from a database that just puts the material submitted by the organisations into categories without critical review. I've been noticing similar elsewhere, and all such articles need to be looked at. )  DGG ( talk ) 21:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I support this nomination. Trim back or delete this indeed "over-detailed promotional press release." -- Mdd (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Simply performed an update to the page, which was outdated in many regards. Maybe to wordy, but as a Not-for-Profit Organisation we do not have experts doing this, why a deletion could be perceived as discrimination of our volunteers all over the world. RW — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:63:2715:5E3B:290A:8635:9BC9:77F (talk) 09:24, 6 September 2015 (UTC)  — 2003:63:2715:5E3B:290A:8635:9BC9:77F (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I do not support this deletion which seems driven by an alterior motive. IPMA is the World's oldest PM Institution and has credible international standing in over 55 countries world wide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isdsharpe (talk • contribs) 11:37, 6 September 2015‎ (UTC) — Isdsharpe (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I do not support the deletion of this article. The original article in question has been cleaned up. Thank you for raising this issue and bringing this to the attention of IPMA. This now looks similar to the other PM association's wikipedia articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psm-canada (talk • contribs) 11:47, 6 September 2015 (UTC)  — Psm-canada (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Thank you for raising this issue. I do not support the deletion of thie article. However, there is a need for the article to be streamlined, enriched and improved. I have made few suggestions in the "talk" section. ChB,Cnbredillet (talk) 12:01, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note I have reverted the improper addition back to a cleaner version with a couple references which are not their own website. There have been an abundance of POV pushers and COI editors coming out of the woodwork this week. I would like to remind User:Psm-canada, User:Cnbredillet and User:2003:63:2715:5E3B:290A:8635:9BC9:77F that the Wikipedia community frowns upon editing articles in which you have a conflict of interest in, and could lead to a blocking of your accounts.- McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 16:44, 6 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I do not support the deletion of IPMA article. IPMA is worldwide recognized and respected voluntary based non-profit organization. It would be a great shame for the objectives of Wikipedia if you take IPMA out of WP. Please do not delete this article. -joxi-PMAF- — 195.156.22.99 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * I do not support the deletion of IPMA article. IPMA is worldwide recognized and respected voluntary based non-profit organization, existing in more than 55 countries. References to this organization is placed in thousands of books and articles world wide. 81.198.169.235 (talk) 13:27, 7 September 2015 (UTC)LNPVA (Latvian National Project Management Association) — 81.198.169.235 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Commment It'saless promotional article, but there remains no evidence of notability.  DGG ( talk ) 04:48, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I do not support the deletion of IPMA article. IPMA is the only global non-for-profit organization of that size (circa 60 national member association across the 6 continents) which has the the mission to develop and promote the project management discipline. References to this organization are placed in numerous publications, university curricula and professional coaching and training consultancies. In some countries (e.g. Croatia) IPMA's certificate credentials are recognized by law as the necessary requirement for managing public projects.Please do not delete this page. Croatian Association for Project Management, MVMvukoman (talk) 07:22, 8 September 2015 (UTC) — Mvukoman (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Note to closing admin A CU was conducted to investigate the SPA and IPs involved in this discussion.The SPAs were found not to be technically related, but it's likely a case of WP:MEATPUPPETRY and therefore as per the policy, it is my recommendation the accounts be treated as a single voice in this discussion. Mkdw talk 05:21, 10 September 2015 (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.