Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foundation for International Development/Relief

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 no consensus. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. DFW makes a decent argument for keeping but unfortunately, one !vote isn't a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Foundation for International Development/Relief

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

fails WP:ORG. only 2 gnews hits [1]. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Sources here and here and what appear (from Google searches such as "FIDR Viet Nam" and "FIDR Cambodia") to be a profusion of relevant foreign language sources, many of them government-based. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:43, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - additionally, WP:ORG provides the following alternative criteria for notability, deeming an organisation notable where (a) the scope of their activities is national or international in scale (FIDR operates in multiple countries) and (b) information about the organization and its activities can be verified by third-party, independent, reliable sources (which it can). Essentially it drops the "significant coverage" criterion in favour of a "wide scope of activity" criterion, which is good as there's plenty of reliable sources on FIDR but not a lot of English-language significant coverage. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 1 April 2010 (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.