Battle of Locust Grove

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Business. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Business|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Business.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Business

MOK Foundation

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

Normally articles like this do come with sources published by PR, and related. Firstly, the article doesn't meets an entry for WP:ORGCRIT. The article told us its based only or per sources, they only practice in Offs, Nigeria, perhaps a local community in Kwara State.

In general, I was looking for a redirect but both the founder and organisation seems to lack credible WP:SIGCOV where one activity is taken or published by one newspaper or there. I can term this WP:ROUTINE. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, and Nigeria. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 00:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commitment control

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

PROD'ded with reason: 'Unreferenced article with ambiguous title.' This wasn't considered clear enough, which I understand. I don't think this topic is a clear topic - 'commitment control' can mean a few things. I couldn't find sources to show this is a notable, clear concept. Boleyn (talk) 18:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can find certain references to this as a concept in financial management ([1]) or a solution within Oracle's PeopleSoft product ([2], in which case it belongs in that article. Nothing else and nothing specific to the retail industry. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:45, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sago Sago

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

Unfortunately the article currently falls well short of WP:GNG and WP:CORP. The article's three cited sources are either bulletin-style without commentary or trivial; regardless generally not WP:SIGCOV about the background of the company. A WP:BEFORE finds a lot of Sago products online but only a Verge product review and a staff interview from Kidscreen (?) seem to enter the standard of coverage needed. I imagine there may be more out there though. There's also a naming issue: if Sago Mini is the current name of the company, the article should not be called Sago Sago unless there is enormous coverage on the former state which is not the case. An obvious WP:ATD is to WP:MERGE what little there is to Toca Boca or Spin Master. Welcome any thoughts, particularly from users that are more experienced with notability pertaining to companies in this sector. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Business, and Internet. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 23:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We need to keep it forever by expanding it Tomasz22334 (talk) 23:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And the references too Tomasz22334 (talk) 23:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And even renaming it to Sago Mini Tomasz22334 (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand it can be a bit disappointing if there is consensus that the article is not notable. WP:GNG is generally a threshold for determining what articles should be included on Wikipedia because there is sufficient coverage to show that the subject merits an article. On keeping an article that doesn't quite meet that standard but could in the future, there's always the ability to develop an article in WP:DRAFT and we can definitely WP:DRAFTIFY the article as an option that doesn't involve deleting anything you've done. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 00:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please expand it, add more references and rename and move it to Sago Mini to keep it forever as a result. Tomasz22334 (talk) 00:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's something that's up to you or an interested editor to do. The AFD discussion here is about whether the subject itself has enough coverage to merit an article in the first place. Although hopefully this discussion can settle whether there's reliable coverage out there. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 00:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As far as I can tell, most of the information on it comes from either sellers of its products, or distributers of the TV show "Sago Mini Friends". Although it is a Spin Master brand, I don't know if there's enough verifiable information on it to justify a merge (especially since the Spin Master page already has most of the information that I could find). Ships & Space_(Edits) 00:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Undo delete Tomasz22334 (talk) 02:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CODE n

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

fails general notability guideline. written like ad copy. ltb d l (talk) 16:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. ltb d l (talk) 16:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Business. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Created by a user who is Working in corporate communications for GFT/CODE_n among others. Exactly the type of article that WP:NCORP is intended to prevent. Jfire (talk) 03:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Workday Adaptive Planning

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

Does not meet WP:CORP, at least in my opinion. There is no significant coverage from a reliable source, the Fortune article cited is simply a serialized list. A cursory Google search for alternative sources didn't turn up much, as they were acquired by Workday. TJS808 (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Management, Software, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:18, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Workday, Inc. All independent available coverage that I can find is in the vein of acquisitions and thus not qualifying under WP:ORGCRIT ([3], [4], [5]). Other available coverage appears to be sponcon or otherwise not independent. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would also second Dclemens1971's opinion to merge for the same reason. Annika59 (talk) 00:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jamia Baitussalam

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

Mostly sourced to dubious sources, does not meet WP:GNG. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Companies, Education, Schools, Religion, Islam, and Pakistan. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 13:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm glad to hear your acknowledgment of GVS as a dubious source. I fully agree that this promotional page should be removed, as it clearly fails to meet WP:N. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 17:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did not acknowledge no such thing (I said mostly dubious), even if GVS is a valid source, it still does not meet notability criteria. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Umbrella fund

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

Failing notability that contains a single source only. 🥒Greenish Pickle!🥒 (🔔) 12:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Selby (psychologist)

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

Nominating this article for deletion because it does not meet the notability guidelines. No reliable sources are referenced or can be found online. Alexwiki0496 (talk) 13:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Business, Spirituality, Psychology, and United States of America. Skynxnex (talk) 15:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Subject spectacularly fails WP:GNG despite the effort to inundate the text with pseudo-sources. The fact that the text has been created, curated, and posted up by a kamikaze account, the same one that provided the (perhaps, self-) portrait, is typically a warning sign. A pachyderm from the land of Prom. -The Gnome (talk) 20:46, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Entertainment

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

The article is a stub article that doesn't explain it's notability. As it stands, it appears to qualify for AfD. Nigel757 (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Nigel757 (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article should not be deleted. It provides comprehensive information about a nonprofit organization seeking to do good work. Remma2 (talk) 18:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please be mindful of WP:USEFUL - just because you believe it provides comprehensive information without explaining why is not a valid Afd argument. If you want the article to be kept, you can demonstrate whether or not it passes notability by showing multiple independent, reliable sources, which the article in its current form does not have. Bandit Heeler (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Entertainment, and Organizations. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability not established. Desertarun (talk) 19:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep So far the references are all short announcements of events, plus some mentions in articles about other topics. I think this establishes the "newsworthy-ness" of the organization but only barely meets GNG. I looked for, but did not find, an indepth source about the organization. That is still needed. Lamona (talk) 03:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a non-notable organization with a lack of sourcing, apart from the usual promotional drivel to support its existence. Zakaria ښه راغلاست (talk) 23:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hubert H. Humphrey Fellowship

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

Fails WP:GNG —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve - This is an exchange program through the US State Department. Granted, the article needs work, and needs better sourcing. But this is a very impressive program. It would be a shame to write this off. — Maile (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some valuable links to YouTube info created by the Fellowship program. — Maile (talk) 21:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on whe wording and sourcing. — Maile (talk) 23:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note - Do Not Delete - Work in Progress: This was inadvertently and prematurely deleted yesterday for copyright errors. I am currently reworking this article in my personal user space, to avoid misunderstandings over sourcing, etc. This is an important article that needs work. Please have patience, and I'll get the article in better shape. — Maile (talk) 12:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised to see you say that I "inadvertently and prematurely deleted" copyright content from Wikipedia. There's no such thing as "prematurely" removing copyright content from Wikipedia. We can't host copyright content on Wikipedia, not even temporarily for editing. And we can't include it in sandboxes or drafts either. — Diannaa (talk) 13:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Business, Education, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Though the article could benefit from a through revision, the subject itself is notable enough. TH1980 (talk) 03:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I just did an edit update of this article. The lead is now more informative about how this program originated, complete with sources. And I've done a sample list of US and foreign universities which act as hosts. — Maile (talk) 23:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I just went through and reviewed the edits made by Maile. Not a single source supports notability under WP:GNG or WP:ORGCRIT. All sources are primary sources (e.g. the authorizing legislation), or they are not independent (State Department webpages or the webpages of Humphrey Fellowship sponsoring institutions), or the coverage is trivial (single references to someone in the article being a Humphrey Fellow). The MPR News source fails verification. My BEFORE search turns up nothing else useful for establishing notability. (One potential source is here, but it is published by a Humphrey Fellowship sponsor institution and I don't have access to the actual text to validate whether it is independent.) Failing the unearthing of significant coverage in multiple, independent, secondary sources, this doesn't clear the bar. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 06:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gates and Partners

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

Unclear that notability has been established. Beland (talk) 04:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Business. Beland (talk) 04:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Aviation, Singapore, United Arab Emirates, Belgium, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All the available coverage falls well within WP:ORGTRIV. I was not able to find anything more substantial. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect into Kennedys Law into which Gates was dissolved. Why wasn't this suggested upfront? gidonb (talk) 13:12, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette^Edit! 18:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]