Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sovereign Wealth Fund 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   no consensus. (WP:NPASR). (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 01:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:CORP, no independent coverage that I am able to find. On the other hand, the Transparency Index may meet the WP:GNG, and might merit a page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:23, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I dispute the deletion of this wikipedia page. - Jason Lee


 * Keep. The Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute is a research company on sovereign wealth funds. It is sourced in over 150 academic journals and is frequently in the media.  Not sure why this was submitted for deletion as this page has been up for quite some time.  In fact, data in Wikipedia is sourced from the SWFI.  The person who submitted the deletion, clearly did not do their homework or do any proper research on the sovereign wealth fund institute.   - Jasonlee723 (talk) 21:27, 5 August 2014 (UTC) - Jason Lee
 * Comment - Footnote 7 does indicate that a Wall Street Journal reporter was using SWFI as an expert source of information on Sovereign Wealth Funds, for what it's worth. Carrite (talk) 18:08, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * And HERE is The Economist siting the think tank Sovereign Wealth Fund Institute as an expert source of information. Reading the tea leaves, this appears to be a notable organization... Carrite (talk) 18:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 06:39, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 00:44, 21 August 2014 (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.