Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Search Inside Yourself Leadership Institute


 * 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 redirect to Chade-Meng Tan. Not much discussion, but I think we have consensus to not keep this around.  Sandstein  08:43, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Search Inside Yourself Leadership Institute

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A non notable leadership organisation advertising its book and course. Szzuk (talk) 22:29, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete It has received a lot of mentions in RS considering it is a mindfulness program, but I don't think there is enough in-depth coverage. The article's creator, Stephstern, appears to have a COI as Steph Stern is "Career Strategist and Engagement Manager at Search Inside Yourself Leadership Institute". Hrodvarsson (talk) 23:40, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:25, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 13:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Chade-Meng Tan, with whom the program is associated. A suitable alternative to deletion. Nothing necessary to merge. czar  18:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 20:39, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions.  Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 21:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, subject has notability independent of Chade-Meng Tan, as evidenced here, here (see here for Europeans), and here (Europeans here). I have no personal relationship with the subject. I have noticed there are many articles about Meng, and I can understand the concern for preventing advertising going widespread, but I think deletion of is not warranted.--  Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 21:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Those sources are the type I was referring to in my !vote. They are essentially passing mentions, not in-depth coverage. Hrodvarsson (talk) 01:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I beg to disagree. They are not just passing mention; there are many paragraphs about the institute's philosophy.-- Farang Rak Tham   (Talk) 14:19, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist, in hopes to obtain more input.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:55, 18 November 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.