Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dar ul Ehsan

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:38, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dar ul Ehsan

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

Fails GNG. by a couple of light years FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, most search results are false positives. sst✈^(discuss) 05:06, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. sst✈^(discuss) 05:07, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. sst✈^(discuss) 05:07, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. sst✈^(discuss) 05:07, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there's certainly been enough time for a better article and simply none of this currently suggests even a marginally notable article. SwisterTwister talk 07:06, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In fact, this could have been nominated for speedy. Fails GNG, Wikipedia is not a directory, no sigcov, the whole nine yards. MezzoMezzo (talk) 10:13, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Having a hard time finding significant coverage about this organisation on GBooks and GNews. - HyperGaruda (talk) 15:53, 21 December 2015 (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.