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. Dennis - 2¢ 21:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Educate My Girl[edit]

Educate My Girl (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)

This article reads like an advertisement and previously had a section asking readers to donate to the organization. It also has no sources other than the organization's website and social media. The user who created it has previously been bocked for creating inappropriate articles. Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 18:26, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Well, I am voting with my heart rather than my brain. It is a 9th grade girl that has started this organisation and she seems to have basically created this wiki page by herself. A lot of energy and enthusiasm. So, can't we overlook all the rules for once and let it be? It doesn't hurt. Kautilya3 (talk) 22:10, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The rules are the rules. We can't allow blatant advertisements disguised as articles. Making exceptions based on emotion damages the integrity of Wikipedia as an Encyclopedia. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 00:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

She is a kid! Give her a break. We can't expect her to understand all our rules perfectly. (I myself don't understand them all.) I think we should nurture her interest and rather than to shoot her down. Kautilya3 (talk) 12:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't some minor policy technicality. This is an attempt to use Wikipedia for advertising and promotion. In addition, the user has been found to be sockpuppeting, so there isn't much "nurturing" to do here. --Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 03:37, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:HARMLESS. --Kinu ^t/_c 16:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I see no indication of notability supported by significant coverage in reliable sources. Also highly promotional. The "keep" !vote above does not take into account Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. --Kinu ^t/_c 03:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Source searches are providing almost no coverage in reliable sources, let alone significant coverage. All I could find was a passing mention here. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:23, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete rather unfortunately, because of lack of coverage. I attempted to find sources myself, and failed to find any. However, I agree with Kautilya that the enthusiasm of this editor should not be stomped upon; throw a mentor at them, if somebody is willing. Kautilya3, you'd be a decent candidate yourself. This was before I saw the evidence of socking. Not much to be done there, now. Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH.Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:RS. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 23:44, 19 October 2014 (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.