Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sustainable Development Policy 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 delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:20, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sustainable Development Policy Institute (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Brought to attention via this Teahouse thread. I strongly considered a WP:G11 speedy, but ultimately decided against it based on the third paragraph of the lead. Still, that organization does not seem to be notable. (There’s also some copyvio, but if we delete it entirely anyway...)

Ref #2 is not even a ref, it’s a bio blurb for a newspaper writer (likely self-published, and a passing mention anyway). Ref #1 and #3 make it survive WP:A7, but that’s it (a 15th place ranking in a regional category of a ranking obtained by a poll of academics is not much notability-wise).

Looking through the English-speaking Pakistani press, one finds a couple of routine coverage mentions (example) but nothing that comes close to GNG. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:03, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Pakistan. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:03, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Reference #1 is a mention in a listing, not WP:SIGCOV. Reference #3 (archived here) is a brief newspaper mention based on that listing. The SDPI does produce useful output (for example this document but I can't find WP:INDEPENDENT sources we could use for Wikipedia. Perhaps surprisingly, there doesn't seem to be an Urdu article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:39, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Michael D. Turnbull I agree with you and feel it should be deleted. I have cleaned it up as much as I could for clarity of information, but still feel it should be deleted. ANLgrad (talk) 19:44, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article is very evidently written by the institute and doesn't show notability. Most information can not be checked. I tried to improve it as much as I could. But still feel it should be deleted. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 19:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Does not seem to meet WP:ORG. ${\displaystyle Clyde2_{3}^{9}}$(👋 • 🗣 • ✍️) 21:19, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.