Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tej Gyan Foundation (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. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 12:23, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Tej Gyan Foundation
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Promotional article that is clear fail of WP:CORPDEPTH. Sources are weak, only shot at notability is having organized a one-off peace festival (there are Google News hits for that) but that is not enough. Logical Cowboy (talk) 18:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 15:13, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 20:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - The article currently reads like an advertisement and focuses more with promotional information or information about the founder, rather than significant content about the foundation. Google News found links that were either insignificant or promotional. As mentioned by the nominator, the only significance appears to be organising the World Peace Festival. Additionally, considering that the author has been the only significant editor, it's not surprising that this article has remained promotional. SwisterTwister   talk  21:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete appears to be a promotion piece. Does not meet the WP:GNG. Vcessayist (talk) 01:33, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - I created this article as I am familiar with the organization. While looking to create the article I found the old deletion discussion . From that discussion, I believed that creating the article with more reliable sources would establish notability. The old discussion stated that one of the notable sources was Indian Express but that it did not have an author . I actually looked up the article and there is an author listed. I have since added it to the article. There is also an article from the Nagaland Post which although not a site visited by people of the English language, it is a very popular news source in India . Not sure if YouTube counts but there are many videos about the organization that are uploaded there . Here is an announcement from the website Life Positive . The other articles that I have in the article that I feel are notable are, , and . The foundation has numerous things that make them notable including the different references that go towards notability, their world record, and the attention that they get for their work. How many non notable organizations have that many celebrities including the Dalai Lama supporting them? Yes there are plenty of press releases that do not count toward notability. I will point out that although they do not count, the press releases that they published are republished by numerous websites that are note worthy. I understand that my vote does not count as I created the article, but I would like people to look at the article again with the above in mind and hopefully allow the article to stay. The foundation is truly a good organization and I have tried what I can to show their notability. --QueenslandPlayer (talk) 20:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Regarding The Indian Express reference that you provided, it only mentions the group once and, like several of the links, is insignificant and mainly focuses with the founder. The Nagaland Post reference is slightly better but also insignificant to support an appropriate article. Also regarding your press releases comment, republishing press releases through notable news sources would not be third-party and appropriate as nearly all press releases are promotional, vague and rarely focus with the significant activities of the subject. SwisterTwister   talk  22:57, 7 October 2012 (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.