Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satyodaya Centre


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Satyodaya Centre

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG The Banner talk 18:03, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America1000 18:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Satisfies criteria for notability. Possible additional refs:
 * – Facebook.
 * – Buddhist recognition.
 * – Colombo Telegraph tribute.
 * – Sri Lanka Brief news interview.
 * – S. Janaka Biyanwila. The Labour Movement in the Global South: Trade Unions in Sri Lanka. London:Routledge (2011) p. 52. ISBN: 978-0-415-58080-9 states that Satyodaya Centre has "made significant interventions in community development issues and  organizing workers" and also "launched the Coordinating Secretariat of the Plantation Areas (CSPA)."
 * – Daily News article.
 * – Daily News archive.
 * – Tom Reidy. Critical Mass. Create Space. ISBN: 978-1481161169. describes it as "a good example of inculturation in action."
 * – Asian Tribune article.
 * – Sunday Times article.
 * – New Internationalist article.
 * – Listing by American Institute for Sri Lankan Studies.
 * Jzsj (talk) 19:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The usual collection of social media, related sources and passing mentions. The Banner talk 19:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You can't be serious on the first one. Also there are a lot of mentions, which do not prove notability &raquo; Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  19:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I've seen Facebook on some schools pages, not of my creation. Please focus on those you can accept and ignore the rest. I suggest that some of the mentions in independent news media above do satisfy for reliability and notability. But that awaits community consensus. Jzsj (talk) 20:04, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Most likely as an external link. But external links are not sources. The Banner talk 20:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * What does "most likely" mean here? And please clarify, or furnish a specific reference to official Wikipedia policy when you make declarations like the above. Jzsj (talk) 21:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You have what, 25,000 edits? Stop pretending you do not know what a good source it, or read WP:RS, as that is where the policy is. If you really do not understand what a good source is, you should stop editing. 96.127.243.251 (talk) 04:32, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The fact that it is been used on other pages should give reason to clean those up, not to add more shit. &raquo; Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  21:45, 10 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete half of sources are from the org itself. As demonstrated in the discussion above, the article creator does not understand WP:ORG or WP:RS, thus, this article on another non-notable org.96.127.243.251 (talk) 04:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails both WP:GNG and WP:NORG. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 18:53, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete -- This has the feel of being about a single mission station, in effect a local church, even if it has some external sourcing. If I am wrong, I am willing to reconsider.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:05, 13 August 2018 (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.