359:
voice is only one we go by consensus so if I'm reading this off color then other editors will see that. it happens, consensus doesn't always follow what a person might want and we all have to accept that. So if I'm off base we'll have had a robust discussion and you have a more accurate view then I did. I'll move on and continue doing what I consider is the best interest for the encyclopedia and so will you 8) It's a good thing. Now I'm going to bow out because a pet peeve of mine in any discussion is when one person overloads the discussion with excessive postings, I believe that I've expressed my rationales well and would only be repeating myself ad naseum at this point, trying to keep in mind
714:, often paraphrased as "spam" or "promo-spam". It basically just means any cause / product for which someone is using Knowledge (XXG) as a promotional tool - a use for which Knowledge (XXG) is not appropriate. Knowledge (XXG) is not the place to "raise awareness" of a cause, no matter how great that cause might be, because Knowledge (XXG) only publishes what has been published elsewhere. If you can find instances of other people giving significant coverage of the topic, you should list those sources here for discussion. It's probably worth having a read of
581:, per the analysis above: none of the many sources are enough for notability, being blogs, not independent of the group or not significant publications such as national newspapers. If it can't be improved with better refs then it can be userfied to work on further and either further work or the passage of time will establish notability. There's
297:(If anyone has a axe to grind these peeps do). It's a clear cut difference for both the notability aspect and the neutral POV. Just a suggestion that you may want to focus more on the sourcing though, because ultimately it isn't deletable on just the overall tone of promotion alone. That's just one of the other reasons I thought it should go.
252:
My opinion is that the actual company does not met the guidelines for inclusion, if the sources presented were from the magazines themselves and not people commenting or self promoting blogs by the founder there would be no argument as it is it has not yet. I do believe that it does have potential at
358:
My last comment on this thread will be that while I still consider this to be promotional if that's all you focus on then you'll miss your goal overall as the notability will be your key to keeping it here. Read through all the comments and references you have here and go from there. Realize that my
196:
Claims notability, I originally nominated for csd however this seems to be more appropriate sue to the claims of notability. A lot of the sources appear to be contributors to a website rather then authors of the magazine (Forbes) or blogs. TO my interpretation I think it's promotional and ultimately
325:
Like I say try and focus on the sourcing because if there's a reason for deletion it will be for that and not for being promotional, which for right now I consider a secondary issue. It will be by definition promotional until it is NPOV and properly sourced. The PETA article can help you with a
549:
and my comment above. There are plenty of "sources" but I'm not seeing much beyond blogs and sources that are clearly not independent of the subject. The fact that some of the "more independent" ones carry the same company-provided photo is telling. There's a good case to be made, I think, for
215:- Could you be more specific about how it's promotional? You originally tagged it for speedy deletion (a minute after it was created) on the grounds of notability and blatant spam. I was as careful as I could be to keep it neutral, but I'm happy to accept advice on how I could improve it.
744:
I'm not trying to raise awareness of anything. The organization has won awards from organizations notable enough for articles on
Knowledge (XXG), which I assumed made it notable enough in its own right. I'll keep working on the references, but would be glad of any help. Thanks,
663:
and here, I've had no answer back yet. Nothing's been removed since you tried to speedy it, there have only been references added, plus info about the award received and the flash-mob in
Kathmandu. Will you please explain how it's promotional? Thanks,
340:"Secondary issue" or not, I'm going to first fix what you called "blatant spam" in your attempted speedy deletion, and "promotional" tone in your present deletion nomination. I've deleted one sentence to which you objected above:
763:. But the awards themselves might confer some notability if they are significant and recognise notable activities. But they would still need to be verified by reliable sources in any case. HIAB's suggestion to consider
635:
is a good reference to you. now this is a possibility, but if there is a real impact made by this company it's probably in Nepal if you can find sources from Nepal that show coverage you might have a better shot.
659:- You originally tried to speedy delete the article as spam, a minute after I created it. You're still saying in your nomination above that it's promotional, but though I've repeatedly asked about this both at
165:
874:
609:, for example, is a student newspaper; the award announcement from peacexpeace.org is not a blog entry, but their site runs on WordPress; etc. So some of the references are blogs, but not all.
854:
118:
311:
Understood about notability, but I'm asking about promotional tone. How can reviewing the PETA article possibly help me address what you regard as promotional tone here?
159:
834:
294:
125:
592:
500:
topics where the article itself is not of an encyclopaedic standard (and is an essay, rather than WP policy). I see it as complementary to
342:"The group aims to build the professional skills of future leaders, in order to tackle the root causes of poverty in their communities."
558:
in good time. But until it does we probably shouldn't have an article in the mainspace. Otherwise we'll just keep coming back to AFD.
17:
710:
If I might, its probably also worth understanding the distiction between real-world email "spam" and
Knowledge (XXG)'s policy
424:
91:
86:
605:
Some of the sources use blog engines (with default layout) for their web sites: this does not necessarily make them blogs.
277:
aims to build the professional skills of future leaders, in order to tackle the root causes of poverty in their communities
244:
aims to build the professional skills of future leaders, in order to tackle the root causes of poverty in their communities
95:
936:
472:. Company in question is relatively new and as such has potential to become more notable given time. Possilby merge into
180:
967:
147:
40:
78:
687:
641:
452:
368:
331:
302:
258:
202:
501:
944:
141:
270:
764:
632:
555:
509:
493:
469:
963:
773:
750:
732:
701:
683:
669:
637:
614:
564:
522:
516:
and I think this topic is a classic case. It is gaining notability, sure, but it's not quite there yet.
448:
382:
364:
349:
327:
316:
298:
284:
254:
220:
198:
36:
137:
948:
915:
886:
866:
846:
825:
811:
780:
754:
739:
705:
691:
673:
645:
618:
596:
571:
529:
484:
456:
426:
386:
372:
353:
335:
320:
306:
288:
262:
224:
206:
60:
279:
to be less promotional? If those sentences are promotional, then please re-word them: I'm mystified.
760:
582:
546:
513:
940:
587:
173:
897:
719:
187:
473:
422:
723:
711:
882:
862:
842:
821:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
962:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
360:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
768:
746:
727:
697:
665:
610:
559:
517:
378:
345:
312:
280:
216:
932:
928:
551:
505:
444:
413:
660:
480:
82:
715:
412:
Sources from Ms. magazine, HuffPo, The Hoya, and
Forbeswoman establish notability under
153:
807:
497:
267:
Understood about notability, but I'm asking about promotional tone. How can I re-word
417:
242:. Based in Kathmandu, Nepal and Arlington, Virginia in the United States. The group
909:
878:
858:
838:
54:
112:
819:
obviously notable and much more so than many other articles on organizations.
476:
74:
66:
900:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
802:
606:
447:
aren't a reliable source when it comes to companies and organizations.
240:
provides women's leadership development training and advocacy in Nepal
233:
The overall tone is advertising in my opinion. Consider just the lead
438:(Huff Post)This is a blog from one of the companies founders Claire C
800:, coverage across multiple different types of secondary sources. —
696:
So you did - we were posting at the same time. I'll answer inline.
956:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
512:) to be considered notable enough for inclusion. We also have
631:
written by people with a close connection to the subject,
875:
list of
Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions
108:
104:
100:
172:
682:
I answered that with my last post look above please.
431:(Forbes)This is from a user of the magazines website.
326:
baseline on how a non profit page should look like.
907:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
623:We understand that but the majority of the sources
238:Women LEAD is a non-governmental organization that
186:
855:list of Organizations-related deletion discussions
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
970:). No further edits should be made to this page.
253:some point but that the time for it is not now.
275:to be less promotional? And how can I re-word
550:userfication. I have no doubt this will pass
8:
873:Note: This debate has been included in the
853:Note: This debate has been included in the
833:Note: This debate has been included in the
344:Anything else promotional in there? Thanks,
295:People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
872:
852:
835:list of Nepal-related deletion discussions
832:
363:so the article gets it's fair discussion.
935:, with coverage from several secondary,
435:] Making this opinion and nothing more
759:Unfortunately not, mostly because of
197:doesn't pass notability guidelines.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
377:Never mind then. I'll quit asking.
24:
273:training and advocacy in Nepal
1:
949:12:47, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
916:01:31, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
504:. But topics must still pass
61:22:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
887:19:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
867:19:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
847:19:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
826:22:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
812:18:46, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
781:10:40, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
755:10:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
740:10:14, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
706:10:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
692:09:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
674:09:54, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
646:10:06, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
619:09:59, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
597:04:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
572:00:19, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
530:00:19, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
485:21:26, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
457:20:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
427:20:09, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
387:14:40, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
373:12:47, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
354:12:31, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
336:10:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
321:10:34, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
307:10:16, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
289:10:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
263:09:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
225:20:03, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
207:19:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
987:
959:Please do not modify it.
496:is more about obviously
32:Please do not modify it.
271:leadership development
433:] this is her profile
937:WP:Reliable sources
657:Query for nominator
443:Lists according to
474:Education in Nepal
48:The result was
918:
889:
869:
849:
590:
508:(or in this case
269:provides women's
978:
961:
912:
906:
902:
777:
736:
684:Hell In A Bucket
638:Hell In A Bucket
586:
568:
526:
502:WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM
449:Hell In A Bucket
420:
365:Hell In A Bucket
328:Hell In A Bucket
299:Hell In A Bucket
255:Hell In A Bucket
199:Hell In A Bucket
191:
190:
176:
128:
116:
98:
57:
34:
986:
985:
981:
980:
979:
977:
976:
975:
974:
968:deletion review
957:
910:
895:
775:
767:is a good one.
734:
661:Talk:Women LEAD
595:
566:
524:
418:
133:
124:
89:
73:
70:
55:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
984:
982:
973:
972:
952:
951:
941:Altered Walter
927:, notable per
921:
920:
919:
904:
903:
892:
891:
890:
870:
850:
829:
828:
814:
794:
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
788:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:
677:
676:
653:
652:
651:
650:
649:
648:
600:
599:
591:
588:JohnBlackburne
575:
574:
543:Delete for now
535:
534:
533:
532:
488:
487:
462:
461:
460:
459:
441:
436:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
293:Try reviewing
250:
249:
248:
247:
246:
228:
227:
194:
193:
130:
69:
64:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
983:
971:
969:
965:
960:
954:
953:
950:
946:
942:
938:
934:
930:
926:
923:
922:
917:
914:
913:
905:
901:
899:
894:
893:
888:
884:
880:
876:
871:
868:
864:
860:
856:
851:
848:
844:
840:
836:
831:
830:
827:
824:
823:
818:
815:
813:
809:
805:
804:
799:
796:
795:
782:
779:
778:
772:
771:
766:
762:
758:
757:
756:
752:
748:
743:
742:
741:
738:
737:
731:
730:
725:
721:
717:
713:
709:
708:
707:
703:
699:
695:
694:
693:
689:
685:
681:
680:
679:
678:
675:
671:
667:
662:
658:
655:
654:
647:
643:
639:
634:
630:
626:
622:
621:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
603:
602:
601:
598:
594:
589:
584:
583:no time limit
580:
577:
576:
573:
570:
569:
563:
562:
557:
553:
548:
544:
540:
537:
536:
531:
528:
527:
521:
520:
515:
511:
507:
503:
499:
495:
492:
491:
490:
489:
486:
482:
478:
475:
471:
467:
464:
463:
458:
454:
450:
446:
442:
439:
437:
434:
432:
430:
429:
428:
425:
423:
421:
415:
411:
408:
407:
388:
384:
380:
376:
375:
374:
370:
366:
362:
357:
356:
355:
351:
347:
343:
339:
338:
337:
333:
329:
324:
323:
322:
318:
314:
310:
309:
308:
304:
300:
296:
292:
291:
290:
286:
282:
278:
274:
272:
266:
265:
264:
260:
256:
251:
245:
241:
237:
236:
235:
234:
232:
231:
230:
229:
226:
222:
218:
214:
211:
210:
209:
208:
204:
200:
189:
185:
182:
179:
175:
171:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
139:
136:
135:Find sources:
131:
127:
123:
120:
114:
110:
106:
102:
97:
93:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
71:
68:
65:
63:
62:
59:
58:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
958:
955:
924:
908:
896:
822:CarolMooreDC
820:
816:
801:
797:
774:
769:
765:WP:CORPDEPTH
733:
728:
656:
633:WP:CORPDEPTH
628:
624:
578:
565:
560:
556:WP:CORPDEPTH
542:
538:
523:
518:
510:WP:CORPDEPTH
494:WP:POTENTIAL
470:WP:POTENTIAL
465:
409:
341:
276:
268:
243:
239:
212:
195:
183:
177:
169:
162:
156:
150:
144:
134:
121:
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
747:Ruby Murray
698:Ruby Murray
666:Ruby Murray
611:Ruby Murray
379:Ruby Murray
346:Ruby Murray
313:Ruby Murray
281:Ruby Murray
217:Ruby Murray
160:free images
761:WP:INHERIT
726:. Cheers,
547:WP:TOOSOON
514:WP:TOOSOON
75:Women LEAD
67:Women LEAD
964:talk page
879:• Gene93k
859:• Gene93k
839:• Gene93k
720:WP:BURDEN
545:- as per
37:talk page
966:or in a
898:Relisted
770:Stalwart
729:Stalwart
724:WP:NOBLE
712:WP:PROMO
607:The Hoya
561:Stalwart
519:Stalwart
419:Gobōnobō
119:View log
39:or in a
911:MBisanz
498:notable
361:WP:TLDR
166:WP refs
154:scholar
92:protect
87:history
56:MBisanz
933:WP:GNG
929:WP:ORG
627:blogs
579:delete
552:WP:GNG
539:Userfy
506:WP:GNG
445:WP:GNG
414:WP:GNG
138:Google
96:delete
716:WP:OR
593:deeds
477:douts
213:Query
181:JSTOR
142:books
126:Stats
113:views
105:watch
101:links
16:<
945:talk
931:and
925:Keep
883:talk
863:talk
843:talk
817:Keep
808:talk
803:Cirt
798:Keep
751:talk
722:and
702:talk
688:talk
670:talk
642:talk
615:talk
541:and
481:talk
468:per
466:Keep
453:talk
410:Keep
383:talk
369:talk
350:talk
332:talk
317:talk
303:talk
285:talk
259:talk
221:talk
203:talk
174:FENS
148:news
109:logs
83:talk
79:edit
50:keep
776:111
735:111
625:are
585:.--
567:111
525:111
188:TWL
117:– (
947:)
939:.
885:)
877:.
865:)
857:.
845:)
837:.
810:)
753:)
718:,
704:)
690:)
672:)
644:)
629:or
617:)
554:/
483:)
455:)
416:.
385:)
371:)
352:)
334:)
319:)
305:)
287:)
261:)
223:)
205:)
168:)
111:|
107:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
85:|
81:|
52:.
943:(
881:(
861:(
841:(
806:(
749:(
700:(
686:(
668:(
640:(
613:(
479:(
451:(
440:]
381:(
367:(
348:(
330:(
315:(
301:(
283:(
257:(
219:(
201:(
192:)
184:·
178:·
170:·
163:·
157:·
151:·
145:·
140:(
132:(
129:)
122:·
115:)
77:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.