Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiki Education Foundation


 * 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   move to draft. Although nobody explicitly suggested this, I'm going to move this to draft. People can continue to work on it there, and when it has garnered sufficient independent, reliable, sources to meet notability guidelines, it can be moved back to the main article space. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Link to draft version: Draft:Wiki Education Foundation

Wiki Education Foundation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This organization is brand new, and has not yet (to my knowledge, and based on some searching) received attention in the media. While this does appear likely to happen, we should be mindful of WP:CRYSTAL. (Although this appears to be an uncontroversial decision, I have chosen AfD instead of PROD or Speedy in order to have a little more transparency in an organizational launch that is rapidly unfolding.) -Pete (talk) 17:54, 21 April 2014 (UTC) Pete (talk) 17:54, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, as creator: First of all, a deletion is not necessary when the content is accurate, the formatting is compliant with MoS and the likelihood of this article having to be re-created is high. If anything, a temporary redirect to Wikimedia Foundation (or related) would be more appropriate, though my vote is to let the article live and snowball. There is nothing wrong with a short article, and there are other sources that could be incorporated into it right now (and surely more in the immediate future). It would be more beneficial to Wikipedia to spend a few moments expanding the article, rather than discussing its deletion. My two cents! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:09, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment, as representative of the organization: While obviously I would prefer to have a Wikipedia article about the Wiki Education Foundation exist, and I thank Another Believer for his hard work on the article, I understand if the lack of outside media coverage of the Wiki Education Foundation means the article should be deleted at this point in time. Following Wikipedia policy is important, and I wouldn't ask for an exception for our organization. I hope to encourage media attention in the coming months; once that's been established, perhaps creating this article could be re-considered? --LiAnna (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, LiAnna. I agree, no exceptions should be made. I'm sure there are many other short articles about other companies and organizations, too. To me, the fact that this organization is related to Wikipedia is irrelevant. (Of course, its relation to Wikipedia is how I know about WEF.) Again, my hope is that the article will be kept and grow, or at worst be redirected until more press coverage exists. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Nice amount of source coverage. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete per LiAnna (Wiki Ed), with no prejudice against subsequent reconsideration. I would likewise hope that the WEF becomes notable in time.  Thus far, there are clearly not enough sources to claim that it is at present. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I hate to say delete, but the organization does not seem ready for a Wikipedia article yet. It might become so in the future. How about userfying it to the creator, User:Another Believer, to preserve their good start until the day when independent reliable sourcing becomes available? --MelanieN (talk) 22:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. I won't !vote, since I'm on the board of the organization, but I will just note that LiAnna's and Jbmurray's comments make sense to me. We've no desire for special treatment -- if sufficient sources don't yet exist, then there shouldn't be an article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 14:22, 30 April 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.