Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wissenschaft im dialog


 * 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  21:48, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Wissenschaft im dialog

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article can be related to twice deleted Wissenschaft im Dialog. Captain Spark (talk) 02:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  08:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  08:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Comment Added a link to the article on the German Wikipedia and one reference/weblink. It is still a stub and poorly written but yes, this organisation does exist. -- Ben Ben (talk) 23:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * And they should be from independent sources. Yes the company does exist but it should be given coverage by some third party sources. I found only one on the net. The current references are from it's own website. 1, 2. Captain Spark (talk) 00:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Changed from Keep to Comment. Wanted to help the author, showing him what is needed (sources). Was a bit over-motivated, even on the partners websites are only a few short mentions of Wissenschaft im Dialog, nothing specific. Btw: please don't write to me in bold letters, thanks. -- Ben Ben (talk) 19:37, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:49, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:33, 14 March 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete and Draft and Userfy if needed because my searches found nothing outstandingly convincing. SwisterTwister   talk  00:57, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07  ( T ) 00:38, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - existence is not notability. I can find a few mentions, but no in-depth coverage on any of the search engines. Fails both WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:22, 31 March 2016 (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.