- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:45, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Naik Foundation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
All sources in the article are either primary, only mention the group in passing or have nothing to do with the foundation. Many of the articles are about someone named Naik (I assume the foundation founder) buying bookstores in various countries. I have not been able to confirm any information in the article. I also had to remove a few very sketchy looking links, one was not even a website, just an IP and a port. Two obviously related single purpose accounts have been editing the article, almost looks like the article creator forgot his password. The notabilty tag was removed and all the bookshop links were added by the second account. One of these accounts also upload the logo claiming they own the logo, indicating self promotion. Ridernyc (talk) 21:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Agreed, all of the references listed are either irrelevant to this group or insufficient and my searches through Google US and India provided nothing useful. This foundation certainly has a noble cause but it would need a complete rewrite with appropriate references. Considering the first external link that the article lists is Marathi, it is certainly likely any useful sources may not be English or Internet-based. SwisterTwister talk 22:20, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - As per SwisterTwister. Irrelevant references seem to have been added to lend notability to the subject. - MrX 01:00, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Lack of significant coverage by reliable secondary sources. Most of the citations are either self-published and unreliable or trivial mentions. The subject does not meet the general notability guideline or the notability guideline for organisations.--xanchester (t) 09:05, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. News results include this article in Express India, but it appears to be about a similarly named but different foundation. I could be wrong, though, because it apparently operates in Gujarat. Nothing significant turns up in web results. Nothing in books. Having said this, I realize that there could be significant coverage in non-English sources. If such coverage can be shown to exist, I may change my stance provided that it's significant. For now, though, fails WP:GNG and WP:NGO. --Batard0 (talk) 18:07, 31 October 2012 (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.