Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Literacy Partners

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. MBisanz ^talk 20:10, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Literacy Partners

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

I PRODed this way back in 2011 for not having any sources and being promotional, and didn't think anymore about it. It seems that a raft of links were added to justify dePRODing, but checking them today I find that apart from an interview in NYT, all the others are either dead links, primary sources or just not relevant. So I did some searching and all Ghits came up with were more primary sources and the usual clutch of sn sites. IMO it still fails WP:ORG. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:33, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Kudpung, I'm a bit surprised you never revisited or added this to your watchlist (several users will so they can watch the activity and like this, when the PROD is removed). My searches found nothing particularly good and it's likely some of the coverage is because it's in New York, this (first article is for a gala event featuring Tom Brokaw), this and this. SwisterTwister talk 17:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - just another NGO, no claim of notability in the article, no significant coverage, fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Kraxler (talk) 15:44, 26 July 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.