Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Scientific Council on the Developing Child (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:02, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

National Scientific Council on the Developing Child
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The content here does not include enough content to establish notability. Two sources are cited now. One is self published and the other is about something other than this topic, and I am not seeing this org profiled in that source. Fails WP:GNG based on available evidence.  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  18:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   Blue Rasberry   (talk)  18:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   Blue Rasberry   (talk)  18:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 03:16, 10 March 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nightfury 10:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. <b style="color: black">Night</b><b style="color: black">fury</b> 10:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete based on detectable coverage. This seems to be an active research center of more than ten year's standing, and they are producing a lot of reports and working papers. However, probably because none of these ever seem to have been published in peer-reviewed journals, there's hardly any mention of this body in the scientific literature, and very few other mentions on the web that are not primary. Productive + low profile = not good article material, unfortunately. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.