DOSEN PROFIL LENGKAP

the following table: Shortcuts WP:CORPDEPTHWP:CORPDEPTH WP:ORGDEPTHWP:ORGDEPTH The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered....

just saying that they're out there. So keep for ORGDEPTH, but don't actually show that is passes ORGDEPTH? Got it. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:21, 4 January 2017...

media coverage, not the more-than-local kind that it takes to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Generally we can justify articles about the major (but not necessarily...

institution that does not satisfy NSCHOOLS as there are no RS satisfying ORGDEPTH, apart from a few database entries and primary sources. VV 16:59, 16 April...

those sources don't seem to offer the in-depth coverage required by WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGCRITE and WP:MULTSOURCES. Furthermore, I think many of those...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) A non-notable organization that clearly fails WP:ORGDEPTH, and only one particular editor has so far edited this article so far and...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Unsourced, Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. MSJapan (talk) 01:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC) Redirect to List of law enforcement...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable local organisation; fails WP:ORGDEPTH with only insignificant, local coverage. StAnselm (talk) 05:38, 30 June...

notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. VV 07:04, 19 April 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. The previous AFD by a sockpuppet, hence the...

free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) fails WP:NORG and notably WP:ORGDEPTH Dom from Paris (talk) 13:01, 3 August 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

source, zero in-depth coverage to show notability. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 17:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...

I'm unable to find any sources that cover the subject in depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 20:26, 13 June 2014 (UTC) Delete per nom - Seems more promotional...

be done there, now. Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH.Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:16, 19 October 2014 (UTC) Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:RS. Origamiteⓣⓒ 23:44, 19 October...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH John from Idegon (talk) 06:55, 18 February 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH - Most of the sources are primary and/or routine and prove they exist,...

and / or WP:SPIP. Awards are not significant. Does not meet WP:NORG / WP:ORGDEPTH. K.e.coffman (talk) 15:15, 6 December 2022 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

include what I presume to be independent analysis, and my reading of WP:ORGDEPTH was that any amount of unattributed analysis by the independent publication...

The sources don't satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGCRIT. VV 15:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC) Delete Sources don't satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Frigidpolarbear (talk) 16:06...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Both sources mentioned in the article fail WP:ORGDEPTH - they discuss a lack of suregeons at the hospital, but not much in depth...

emphasized in WP:ORGDEPTH. I would appreciate it if you would read ORGDEPTH, because you seem to be ignoring it. Platonk brought up ORGDEPTH right away in...

searches and web searches did not yield any coverage that satisfies WP:ORGDEPTH. In fact, all I can find are social media profiles controlled by the organisation...

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC) Delete. Lacks sources with WP:ORGDEPTH. Previously deleted as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meditation for Spiritual...

Talk 19:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC) Delete. Fails WP:ORG in particular WP:ORGDEPTH. MarnetteD|Talk 15:10, 9 September 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

I could find is [1], but it is only a passing mention, thus failing WP:ORGDEPTH. Esquivalience t 00:34, 12 April 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

specifically excluded in WP:ORGDEPTH. --Tgeairn (talk) 19:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC) Please read WP:BEFORE. For sources that meet WP:ORGDEPTH criteria, you need...

"ক্যান্টনমেন্ট বোর্ড বালক উচ্চ বিদ্যালয়" I was unable to find any WP:ORGDEPTH coverage. Appearing in lists of secondary schools is not enough to pass...

find any independent sources that cover the company in depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH.- MrX 01:32, 31 January 2015 (UTC) Changing !vote to 'keep' based on sources...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 15:44, 18 June 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Unsourced, fails WP:ORGDEPTH. MSJapan (talk) 01:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC) Redirect to List of law enforcement...

satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS. The sources found during a WP:BEFORE do not satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH as they consist of paid databases and primary sources. I have cleaned up...

press releases and one mere mention found in Information Age. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 13:37, 26 January 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

advertising WP:NOTPROMO. Also, fails ORGDEPTH. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:04, 29 October 2019 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH in that coverage is trivial and...

coverage about the Institute itelf, I am afraid this isn't enough for WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 08:36, 2 March 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

important company, but it obviously operates behind the scenes. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH.- MrX 14:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in the...

article about a school, with no reliable sources present to get it over WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG -- the only sources present here are its own website about itself...

chance this local student run school debate club will ever meet GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH so keeping this draft, which no one is working on, around forever is pointless...

notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. VV...

independent sources, with that that exists being incidental. Does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Kb.au (talk) 05:20, 25 January 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...

university. Sources consist of press releases and routine coverage. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 11:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) YouTube prank group from Western Australia. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, lacking a breadth of in-depth coverage, which is independent of the subject...

independent reliable sources about the organisation which can satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. I am not even able to verify any of the content and I recommend a WP:DEL7...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. VV 09:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

fails WP:ORGDEPTH because there's no in-depth information about the org either. This from WHDH says nothing about the topic org, fails ORGDEPTH This Newsweek...

source with a two-sentence mention, which does not confer notability per WP:ORGDEPTH, and none of the sources discussed on talk page have shown any level of...

JSTOR · TWL) Paid promo of a non-notable organization that clearly fails WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS 💬 13:52, 14 November 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been included...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGIND AM (talk) 03:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC) Note: This debate has...

WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH.Onel5969 TT me 16:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC) Delete - References fail to clear the hurdle of WP:GNG, WP:NCORP, or WP:ORGDEPTH. The article...

Article about an organisation which does not seem to meet WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH, The current references are primary or connected to the organisation. Searches...

enough reliable source media coverage about the award to pass WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH. But apart from one post to a publishing industry PR blog, the only other...

relevant references and valid links - as per WP:ORGIND and in adherence to WP:ORGDEPTH. AM (talk) 03:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC) Delete as searches found nothing...

Thanks, North America1000 03:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. I do see a bunch of sources which shows that the organisation exists (for...

28 January 2015 (UTC) Delete - local club that wouldn't seem to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. St★lwart111 07:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC) Comment - "I now realise that...

the group page and the WP article. Looks like WP:1EVENT/WP:NOTNEWS. WP:ORGDEPTH is not met, as all of the organization's coverage is limited to the flyering...

February 2020 (UTC) I note that instead of providing sources meeting WP:ORGDEPTH Djm has left the AfD, saying so in edit summary. DBigXrayᗙ 12:25, 22 February...

at one point in time. Has received insufficent coverage to indicate WP:ORGDEPTH. As it appears to be a non-profit, as per WP:NONPROFIT guidelines, 'The...

only gives routine coverage to the organisation. It fails to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 19:50, 29 September 2021 (UTC) Keep this...

speak about the plans to merge. There is no WP:ORGDEPTH coverage here. Note what is required for ORGDEPTH: Such coverage provides an organization with a...

edits should be made to this page.‎ The result was keep. Passes Wikipedia:ORGDEPTH Guerillero | My Talk 05:13, 14 January 2014 (UTC) Institute of Food Science...

Sheldybett (talk) 07:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:NORG / WP:ORGDEPTH. Promotional 'cruft. --K.e.coffman (talk) 03:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC) Delete...

building/institution itself is not inherently notable and needs to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. This doesn't. St★lwart111 13:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC) I still say keep -...

free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) fails WP:NORG and notably WP:ORGDEPTH the sources are a mixture of press releases routine coverage and churnalism...

should be made to this page.‎ The result was delete due to lack of WP:ORGDEPTH coverage. RL0919 (talk) 17:59, 31 July 2021 (UTC) [Hide this box] New to...

Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 15 September 2022 (UTC) Delete: does not meet / WP:ORGDEPTH. --K.e.coffman (talk) 19:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC) Delete. Not finding...

find that this former squat house of the local interest doesn't pass WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:NORG and in determining/WP:SIRS, series of coverage by the same publisher...

(talk) 06:45, 30 November 2019 (UTC) Delete: does not meet WP:NORG / WP:ORGDEPTH. Sufficiently obscure that a redirect is not needed. Nothing to merge,...

organization" does not make a corporation notable see last point of WP:ORGDEPTH. The organization is not significant enough to have enough sources. Many...

listings, press releases, and primary sources. Fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG, and WP:ORGDEPTH. WP:NOTYELLOW. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC) Keep...

university. No third party references can be found about it (fails WP:ORGDEPTH). Lemongirl942 (talk) 11:56, 26 March 2016 (UTC) Delete per WP:CLUB, 22...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:NORG and specifically no WP:ORGDEPTH, all sources routine anouncements of course introductions or the opening...

this page.‎ The result was delete. WP:SSEFAR does not override WP:GNG, WP:ORGDEPTH, and Wikipedia's other policies and guidelines. Kurykh (talk) 05:11, 28...

[1]. There are no reliable sources in the article, so doesn't pass WP:ORGDEPTH. Drchriswilliams (talk) 13:42, 21 April 2016 (UTC) Delete - lacks coverage...

association, only source is their own website, no coverage to pass WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2015 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:GNG since...

that would make this team pass WP:ORG, especially to the depth that WP:ORGDEPTH requires. Tavix | Talk  01:08, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has...

Seraphim System (talk) 04:30, 13 April 2018 (UTC) Keep - subject meets WP:ORGDEPTH based on sources already in article, including multiple newspaper reports...

None of these sources meet WP:ORGDEPTH, and the current article is just spammy. This should be deleted unless any ORGDEPTH sources can be found. Sirfurboy🏄...

the WP:ORGDEPTH criteria. AllyD (talk) 12:12, 30 September 2018 (UTC) Delete I found a source,[1] though this clearly fails to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Sdmarathe...

considered evidence of notability, but still may not satisfy the criteria of WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG.--Animalparty-- (talk) 14:56, 29 May 2014 (UTC) --Animalparty--...

organization. And as such it must pass WP:ORGDEPTH. While it does get some local coverage it does not pass ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 01:07, 2 January 2021...

and not a "school" as such. I am unable to find enough sources for WP:ORGDEPTH or to show why this is significant. There is also no indication that it...

deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:40, 27 May 2015 (UTC) Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH. I could not find in-depth coverage about this organization. The results...

about a smalltown fire department, with no evidence of notability per WP:ORGDEPTH. As written, all this really does is list what equipment they happen to...

subject lacks notability at this point and the article fails WP:CRYSTAL, WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:NOTDIR. Perhaps at some point in the future the subject will be...

14 September 2017 (UTC) Delete May pass GNG but most defiantly fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Article suffers from a severe, in my mind fatal, lack of third party sources...

fame, very little coverage, and nothing which would allow it to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 12:37, 12 August 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Absolutely no indication of meeting WP:GNG let alone WP:ORGDEPTH. Me-123567-Me (talk) 00:01, 6 March 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

professional association, only source is their own website, no coverage, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 00:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

there is hardly any reliable third party coverage. Delete as it fails WP:ORGDEPTH. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC) Keep - I will make updates...

party coverage, so at this point it appears WP:TOOSOON to meet the WP:ORGDEPTH criteria. AllyD (talk) 19:54, 21 November 2016 (UTC) Don't delete: Additional...

December 2023 (UTC) Thrillist article is far from meeting the threshold of WP:ORGDEPTH. It is not a significant, independent, secondary source, but rather just...

small film festival, not properly referenced as clearing WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. The referencing here is parked almost entirely on blogs and the festival's...

discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:58, 22 November 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, next to no coverage exists on the subject, and what does exist does is...

sources are press releases and passing mention - nothing close to meeting WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS 💬 12:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been included...

unfortunately could not find anything there either. I'm sorry to say that the WP:ORGDEPTH requirements are a bit stricter than what's available, and it's quite rare...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Reads like an advertisement, fails WP:ORG and WP:ORGDEPTH JMHamo (talk) 10:26, 15 September 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

organization that exists at all would always have an entry in. And per WP:ORGDEPTH, that coverage has to extend beyond the purely local. Bearcat (talk) 22:49...

politician used school as PR backdrop (x2), etc. Not enough at all, per WP:ORGDEPTH, that "makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub...

significant coverage or passing mentions. I can't find anything to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Dylsss(talk • contribs) 19:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC) Keep Wasn't able...

two controversial, but not notable, events. Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ORGDEPTH. Kb.au (talk) 08:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

Article has several citations, none of which count towards notability (WP:ORGDEPTH). They consist of directory entries, non-notable awards, branch openings...

company about which most sources are PR; can't find much to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGIND. This is the author's only contribution to Wikipedia thus...

discussions. North America1000 17:44, 8 February 2018 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. --Hagennos ❯❯❯ Talk 05:33, 9 February 2018 (UTC) Delete-Nothing other...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable article created by SPA, fails WP:ORGDEPTH -- samtar whisper 13:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable article created by SPA, fails WP:ORGDEPTH -- samtar whisper 13:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC) Delete Searches show zero...

the owner of the company by a school they went to. That source lacks WP:ORGDEPTH and would be considered a dependent source because it's associated to the...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This article fails WP:ORGDEPTH as it looks like a PR stunt. This source only mentions a new service the...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non notable company. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH as all references are primary sources or a single news item regarding blocking...

account. Celestina007 (talk) 18:12, 15 June 2020 (UTC) Delete fails WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS 💬 11:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per source searches, does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Sources providing in-depth coverage are primary sources, press releases...

coverage in the books via G'books but trivial therefore this one fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Saqib (talk) 10:45, 5 April 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...

while this might be a case of WP:TOOSOON, currently it does not pass WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 17:03, 15 January 2021 (UTC) Keep no point in deleting...

sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject" nor meeting WP:ORGDEPTH which states "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be...

October 2015 (UTC) Delete. Not turning up significant coverage, fails WP:ORGDEPTH. --Djembayz (talk) 14:27, 1 November 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is...

WP:N also it fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGSIG. Dz5t 8O12 (talk) 21:36, 12 May 2026 (UTC) Delete I agree, fails WP:GNG & WP:ORGDEPTH. jolielover♥talk 08:52...

free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable company fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available sources. - MrX 13:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC) The...

02:42, 29 September 2018 (UTC) @Sargdub:--Please read WP:ORGIND and WP:ORGDEPTH.∯WBGconverse 16:33, 7 October 2018 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough...

Wikipedia isn't the place for spam. Additionally, the article fails WP:ORGDEPTH. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 23:58, 10 February 2015 (UTC) The above discussion...

Still not enough in-depth coverage in searches to meet either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 16:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

more than a passing mention and do not establish notability. As per WP:ORGDEPTH the depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered....

only trivial mentions, no in-depth coverage of the subject, fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Kraxler (talk) 16:28, 10 July 2015 (UTC) Delete A promo piece Heyyouoverthere...

the company not about the artists. Please see WP:NCORP, WP:ORGIND, WP:ORGDEPTH for some of the specific guidelines. PS. Please remember to sign your talk...

releases, product announcements, or directory listings of this business; WP:ORGDEPTH specifically calls out these sort of sources as not acceptable for establishing...

WP:CORPDEPTH ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 12:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC) Delete- Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Of the few available sources, some do not seem to be independent[1], and...

organization fails ORGDEPTH; we have a PDF with an article primarily about Ram Nepal and almost nothing about the topic org, fails ORGDEPTH also; we have an...

Kong, *Belgium as seen in the edit history of the template [1] Fails WP:ORGDEPTH and likely other criteria. Before anyone says Keep because it is a pageant...

discuss the company directly. I have not found any sources that satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 23:36, 22 February 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. VV 13:04, 15 April 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

of which seems likely to be press release generated content. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 13:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available sources. - MrX 12:18, 18 February 2017 (UTC) I've...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH JMHamo (talk) 15:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

primary sources and it does not have sufficient notability to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH and lacks significant coverage in independent secondary sources with audience...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Article about a company that does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:SIGCOV. Only dependent on two sources which a large part of the...

releases and mere mentions about their startup funding activities. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 01:22, 17 June 2014 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

under your criteria, but has even less media coverage than USACO. Per WP:ORGDEPTH these two would be both not notable. 0xDeadbeef (talk) 07:07, 23 March...

independent sources (at least when the organization was intact). In terms of WP:ORGDEPTH I think the examples listed in the policy are more trivial than what one...

JSTOR · TWL) No evidence of in-depth, independent coverage satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:ORGIND. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:38, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Note: This debate...

transferable. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC) Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH as it currently stands. This organization's recognitions are routinely...

than any evidence of third-party coverage that would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not "inherently" notable just because their...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) I can find no evidence that this organization meets WP:ORGDEPTH. Available sources are of questionable reliability and a few that make...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:GNG. Akevsharma (talk) 10:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

with primary and unreliable sources, fails to meet WP:ORGCRITE and WP:ORGDEPTH. M.Ashraf333 (talk) 06:07, 26 February 2023 (UTC) Delete. Via WP:NOTCATALOG...

coverage, and coverage about the founder's previous company. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available independent sources. - MrX 18:45, 15 May 2017 (UTC)...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. The only sources that I am able to find are press releases and routine...

about itself with no evidence being shown that it would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Bearcat (talk) 03:55, 3 October 2017 (UTC) Can we not G13 this under the...

doesn't seem to meet WP:NORG - lacks independent coverage meeting the WP:ORGDEPTH thresholds. MrsSnoozyTurtle 04:56, 5 March 2023 (UTC) Redirect to National...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. A tag has been on for 8 months and nothing has been added to help prove...

For example see the first source used in the article. Furthermore WP:ORGDEPTH isn’t met. A before search turns up nothing concrete. Celestina007 (talk)...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. VV...

MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 08:00, 7 December 2020 (UTC) Delete Promotional, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Prolix 💬 16:04, 7 December 2020 (UTC) Delete per all of the above Spiderone...

than any evidence of third-party coverage that would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not "inherently" notable just because their...

I am unable to find sufficient sources to establish notability per WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 12:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

subject of enough reliable source coverage in media to clear WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH. While there is one actual piece of media coverage in the contextless linkfarm...

listings, press releases, and primary sources. Fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG, and WP:ORGDEPTH. WP:NOTYELLOW. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:20, 31 December 2013 (UTC) NOTE:...

articles just because they exist, but rather they must pass WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH on the depth and geographic range of their media coverage -- but six of...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Promotional article. Article fails WP:ORGDEPTH, not having in-depth coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources...

notable in any way. Bearian (talk) 16:11, 2 August 2018 (UTC) Delete - no WP:ORGDEPTH. Jmertel23 (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2018 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH Best source I could see is [1] which gives one sentence on a winner. Don't...

discussions. North America1000 19:25, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Lots of big names from the UK's progressive house scene associated with...

Looking at the sources in the article, and my own searching, this fails WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:AUD, and WP:ORGIND. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)...

(four pages) and Daily Mail exceed "routine restaurant reviews" per WP:ORGDEPTH, providing in-depth coverage. Jack N. Stock (talk) 04:30, 22 March 2017...

notable organization that fails to satisfy WP:ORG and invariably has no WP:ORGDEPTH. The organization was established this year thus WP:TOOSOON applies here...

Spider) 19:35, 6 April 2021 (UTC) Delete - does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 15:15, 8 April 2021 (UTC) Delete per nom's rationale. Megtetg34...

sourcing from independent reliable sources to meet either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 01:28, 27 August 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Sources consist of trivial listings and routine reporting based on a press...

closely affiliated and unreliable for establishing notability. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 13:24, 5 December 2013 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

find any reliable sources that discuss the subject in depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 02:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:45, 26 May 2026 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:NORG / WP:ORGDEPTH per review of available sources. --K.e.coffman (talk) 23:33, 30 May 2026...

A7. A search for reliable sources failed to find coverage to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Passing mentions and local coverage only. • Gene93k (talk) 15:25, 10 November...

school notability Secondly, those articles don't pass WP:ORGDEPTH, and SIGCOV. But SIGCOV and ORGDEPTH are not requirements for notability, they merely, upon...

article. Sock (tock talk) 17:36, 30 December 2014 (UTC) Delete per WP:ORGDEPTH. This organization is not covered in the Los Angeles Times, Variety, and...

organization has several entirely unsourced sections and clearly doesn't meet WP:ORGDEPTH. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

28 March 2017 (UTC) Delete - not finding enough to show they pass WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 21:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC) Strong Delete -- not only local...

Thanks, - TheMagnificentist 09:34, 24 July 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH.--SamHolt6 (talk) 13:41, 28 July 2017 (UTC) Delete not enough coverage...

2018 (UTC) Delete as per the nom, the sources are way too weak to pass WP:ORGDEPTH and also as this is very probably SEO undeclared paid creation. Creator...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. The creator is an WP:SPA with only one edit...

are not providing any coverage in reliable sources. Appears to fail WP:ORGDEPTH for a Wikipedia article. NorthAmerica1000 06:08, 29 June 2014 (UTC) The...

about a student housing cooperative, not properly referenced as passing WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia...

than any evidence of third-party coverage that would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not "inherently" notable just because their...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Not notable per WP:ORGDEPTH. The references are limited to trivial mentions or brief listings. - The9Man...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per source searches, does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. North America1000 19:18, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable organization that does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Available sources are all primary and do not meet the standards of WP:ORGIND...

are WP:ROUTINE and I'm not seeing anything that would make it pass WP:ORGDEPTH. Tavix | Talk  03:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

Delete A small set of sources when the blog was launched, none meeting WP:ORGDEPTH. Femke (talk) 20:13, 3 February 2022 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Not notable. Little depth of coverage, WP:ORGDEPTH. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:55, 23 June 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

19:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC) Delete. Just some routine coverage that fails WP:ORGDEPTH. --MarioGom (talk) 07:35, 9 March 2020 (UTC) Delete No indication of notability...

free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) fails WP:NORG notable WP:ORGDEPTH there is just 1 passing mention in the sources. A before search throws...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) No evidence of notability per WP:ORGDEPTH. I would have nominated it for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#A7, but the...

(talk) 21:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC) Delete: does not meet WP:NORG / WP:ORGDEPTH. --K.e.coffman (talk) 15:50, 27 November 2019 (UTC) The above discussion...

WP:CORPDEPTH and GNG. -- HighKing++ 13:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC) Delete - Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. The (primary) source for the Clio award does not say that Surround received...

Despite the sources recently added the company fails WP:NORG notably WP:ORGDEPTH; The sources are essentially press releases and 2 local news stories that...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) I find at most minimal coverage meeting WP:ORGDEPTH. Largoplazo (talk) 12:02, 22 September 2016 (UTC) Delete, non notable;...

sources failing WP:GNG and lack of multiple sources means not even near WP:ORGDEPTH. Search also only yielded the article and its WP mirrors. –Ammarpad (talk)...

National society, whose notability can be verified as meeting WP:ORG via WP:ORGDEPTH by addition of existing, reliable, secondary sources. Sam Sailor Talk!...

Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:GNG AusLondonder (talk) 23:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC) The above...

discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:55, 23 November 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. The article's claim of being the largest music company in Punjab seems...

practice for non-notable schools. RS coverage is not enough to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC) Keep: The school was named...

JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable company, no sources found to meet WP:COMPANY or WP:ORGDEPTH. JayJayWhat did I do? 02:57, 9 January 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

notable organization that doesn’t meet WP:NCORP and also do not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Celestina007 (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

notability or significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary: WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG. Bash7oven (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

September 2015 (UTC) Delete, possible violation of WP:PROMO. As well as WP:ORGDEPTH, as the article is a stub. —Skyllfully (talk | contribs) 03:53, 29 September...

(understandably) underestimating just how strict WP:NCORP, and specifically WP:ORGDEPTH are. Sources need to discuss the company itself, and in detail too. Going...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable organization that does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH, as per several source searches. North America1000 11:42, 24 June 2018...

referenced in the article, which is insufficient for notability. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 06:26, 2 August 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:49, 5 March 2018 (UTC) Delete fails ORGDEPTH a passing mention and 3 PR pieces are not enough to prove notability. Dom...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a before. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. VV 08:52...

(UTC) Delete - just another local fundraising org, no coverage, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 15:33, 15 August 2015 (UTC) Delete as per nom and above...

guaranteed Wikipedia articles just because they exist; they must clear WP:ORGDEPTH on a volume and/or geographic range that expands significantly beyond just...

the subject. A WP:BEFORE found no WP:SIGCOV and fail WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:36, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

listings, press releases, and primary sources. Fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG, and WP:ORGDEPTH. WP:NOTYELLOW. NOTE: This article is one of around 62 mass produced from...

free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) fails WP:NORG notably WP:ORGDEPTH. The sources are 1: company website, 2: passing mention, 3: business directory...

notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. VV...

than any evidence of third-party coverage that would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not "inherently" notable just because their...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Not Notable. According to WP:GNG and WP:ORG and WP:ORGDEPTH , A company, corporation, organization, school, team, religion, group,...

find any reliable sources the cover the organization in detail. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 02:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

TWL) Poorly-sourced, promotional article about a company that fail the ORGDEPTH notability guideline. Previously speedily deleted and then recreated with...

WP:NORG as a WP:BEFORE shows user generated sources, and Vendor sources. WP:ORGDEPTH is a major fail here. Celestina007 (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2022 (UTC)...

keeping. South Nashua (talk) 15:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH.--SamHolt6 (talk) 03:20, 27 November 2017 (UTC) The above discussion is...

Furthermore a before search turns up nothing concrete. Needless to say WP:ORGDEPTH is absent Celestina007 (talk) 19:10, 9 October 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

at WP:GROUP. Such a local event/organization is unlikely to have any WP:ORGDEPTH coverage. Ifnord (talk) 19:41, 23 December 2018 (UTC) The above discussion...

Source searches are only providing passing mentions; does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. North America1000 09:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) WP:ORGDEPTH not met. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:47, 9 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Newly-formed football club fails WP:ORGDEPTH. The only reference I found merely confirms their existence. - MrX 13:08...

not been covered in-depth by any reliable source. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH Paul_012 (talk) 10:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

but the rest were just directory listings. Not enough sources to pass WP:ORGDEPTH. -DM The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please...

in reliable sources independent of them. Needless to say there’s no WP:ORGDEPTH. A before search predominantly links me to primary unreliable sources....

received very little coverage and apparently only in local media. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 20:59, 7 June 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

suggest notability, could not find any sources that meet WP:ORG or WP:ORGDEPTH. JayJayWhat did I do? 03:48, 8 January 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

sources. Meatsgains (talk) 17:04, 20 April 2017 (UTC) Delete - Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available independent sources.- MrX 17:14, 20 April 2017 (UTC)...

instead the inclusion bar requires the organization to pass WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH on its sourceability, but four of the six footnotes here are primary sources...

WP:SUSTAINED and WP:ORGDEPTH. I also found these in-depth articles which discuss the company [1] [2].- MrX 22:36, 28 May 2016 (UTC) ORGDEPTH specifically mention...

(talk) 21:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC) Delete - meets neither WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. And salt in light of the activity of the article's creator. Onel5969 TT...

are press releases and routine coverage about venture capital. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 10:32, 13 July 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

discussions. North America1000 18:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC) Keep – Meets WP:ORGDEPTH per a review of available sources. The topic also passes WP:AUD, having...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:GNG, WP:ORGDEPTH, and WP:MUSICBIO. Except for this and this (which reads like a press release)...

(talk) 20:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC) Delete - meets neither WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 13:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

conduct legislation, as well as its international dimension, meets WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 09:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC) Keep, nice deal of source coverage...

year old coalition. I am unable to find any reliable sources. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 17:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

11:34, 26 October 2018 (UTC) Delete non-notable company (through both WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:NCORP). Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 11:40, 26 October...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Non-notable local street gang with minimal depth of coverage. Magnolia677...

find a few mentions of it in some small newspapers, nothing indicated WP:ORGDEPTH. Agree with nom on WP:PROMO issues. Bordwall(talk⁄ctrb) 17:05, 13 June...

group in Lyon, with an after the fact extension to past artists. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 07:54, 11 April 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a...

JSTOR · TWL) Insufficient coverage in available sources; does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Source searches under its former and current name are only providing passing...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable church that does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH, as per WP:BEFORE source searches. North America1000 04:13, 23 April 2019...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) No apparent notability and does not meet WP:ORG and WP:ORGDEPTH. Individual branches or chapters of larger organizations are not inherently...

towards corporate notability: Additionally, I'm also not able to find WP:ORGDEPTH-level coverage of GRUNGECAKE form multiple independent RS after conducting...

unable to find any sources that cover the subject in any depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 14:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

listings, press releases, and primary sources. Fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG, and WP:ORGDEPTH. WP:NOTYELLOW.} Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:42, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Delete...

mergers nothing significant about the company. Fails WP:NCOMPANY and WP:ORGDEPTH. JayJayWhat did I do? 02:37, 22 December 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

the WP:NORG or WP:ORGDEPTH . Ldemignot (talk) 11:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC) Non notable company. Does not satisfy WP:NORG or WP:ORGDEPTH . Hagennos ❯❯❯ Talk...

outside of its own local area to satisfy the wider audience criterion in WP:ORGDEPTH. Wikipedia does not grant groups an exemption from our notability and sourcing...

01:24, 6 March 2017 (UTC) Delete No indication of meeting WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH AusLondonder (talk) 16:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC) Delete I tried to improve...

company that lacks in-depth coverage in reliable sources as required by WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS 💬 08:33, 26 May 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been included...

TWL) References given do not establish notability as in WP:NCORP OR WP:ORGDEPTH. Whiteguru (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...

deletion discussions. GSS 💬 03:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:ORGDEPTH, a good amount of the sources could have WP:RS issues ~RAM (talk) 08:40...

(UTC) Delete - The only real coverage is from press releases. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH.- MrX 14:54, 27 September 2015 (UTC) Comment Created by confirmed Orangemoody...

am unable to find any sources that cover the subject in depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH.- MrX 02:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC) - MrX 02:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC) Note:...

20:26, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Delete Zero evidence of meeting WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH AusLondonder (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC) The above discussion...

make any sourcing improvements to get the organization past WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH -- they just commented that it should be approved because it would survive...

website does not even list an address. No evidence that the subject meets WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 16:20, 1 October 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

none that are about it for the purposes of getting it over WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Bearcat (talk) 19:13, 7 March 2018 (UTC) Delete - unsourced and no evidence...

find any reliable sources that discuss the subject in any depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 20:01, 23 June 2013 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

Delete - not enough sourcing available to show it passes WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 15:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

Article created by probably COI account. Clear fail of WP:ORGCRITE and WP:ORGDEPTH. AusLondonder (talk) 23:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) I tried but can't find anything that satisfies WP:ORGDEPTH and as pointed out by Piotrus in their prod rational current sources seem...

organisation with no in-depth coverage in reliable sources as required by WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS 💬 16:19, 21 June 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been included...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Keep – Meets WP:ORGDEPTH per a review of available sources. See examples below. North America1000...

sources to show that it meets WP:GNG, and doesn't come close to passing WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 11:27, 23 April 2018 (UTC) Delete - I found it listed in...

JSTOR · TWL) Not enough in-depth coverage to pass either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 16:00, 19 June 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...

mentioning it rather than true secondary coverage. Nothing particular passes WP:ORGDEPTH, and most of the source discussion doesn't really rise above WP:FART territory...

discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC) Keep - Meets WP:ORGDEPTH. Source examples include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Northamerica1000(talk)...

(UTC) Delete with the one exception, per source assess table fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Iljhgtn (they/them · talk) 21:11, 23 February 2026 (UTC) Delete-per source...

free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Doesn't appear to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. It did land a large client in 2010, the AFL-CIO,[1] and lost a co-founder...

Poorly sourced article about a company. No evidence of notability. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 12:00, 1 June 2014 (UTC) Delete: The contributing editor's user...

of the references provided [3][4] do not satisfy the requirement for WP:ORGDEPTH. The two additional references in google news beyond those provided above...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Non-notable local street gang with minimal depth of coverage. Magnolia677...

mentions in Google Books but not sure there is anything satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH there Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:41, 8 July 2021 (UTC) Relisted to generate...

Doesn't achieve the standards for notability that are required by WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:GNG.Drchriswilliams (talk) 12:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC) The above...

TWL) No sign of notability as it's stated in the following guidelines WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG, WP:VERIFYOR. The article cannot boast with significant coverage...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Not a notable organization. Sources do not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 12:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC) This basically should...

JSTOR · TWL) This article does not prove that the organisation meets WP:ORGDEPTH it presents the organisation as a humanitarian charity but the principal...

and a quick search does not reveal any such reasons for notability. WP:ORGDEPTH is not readily met here. Besieged (talk) 16:50, 23 October 2012 (UTC) Keep:...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Inadequately-sourced article about a company. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of reliable sources that cover the company in depth. - MrX 11:35...

association, any sources I found were trivial and did not meet WP:ORG or WP:ORGDEPTH. JayJayWhat did I do? 03:19, 14 January 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

coverage in reliable sources amounts to none. Fails WP:AUD, WP:ORGIND and WP:ORGDEPTH. — fortunavelut luna 11:33, 31 August 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has...

TWL) Non-notable organisation. Does not meet WP:NORG, particularly WP:ORGDEPTH. Tgeairn (talk) 22:23, 12 February 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

foundation itself is definitely newsworthy and there's significant WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:AUD to establish that. In other words, it meets both criteria specified...

Necrothesp (talk) 13:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC) Delete – Does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Source coverage consists of passing mentions (e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4]...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Non-notable local street gang with minimal depth of coverage.Magnolia677...

Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 04:51, 4 October 2017 (UTC) Delete Agree, failure of WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGIND make this nothing more than unencyclopaedic, recycled-PR...

North America1000 07:49, 13 May 2016 (UTC) Delete per nomination. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:GNG.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 18:46, 13 May 2016 (UTC) Delete as rather...

article Leodikap (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH due to a severe lack of coverage.--SamHolt6 (talk) 03:57, 17 September...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 23:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC) Delete. Lacks coverage in independent...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) No apparent notability and does not meet WP:ORG and WP:ORGDEPTH. Individual branches or chapters of larger organizations are not inherently...

policy to this article or not. But if we do, then it clearly fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGCRITE and probably some other things. Apples&Manzanas (talk)...

run-of-the-mill charity, no coverage in independent sources, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 02:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

sources independent of them. WP:SIRS isn’t applicable, there is no WP:ORGDEPTH, a before search shows me no cogent sources, I see predominantly user generated...

could find were some very brief mentions in local newspapers. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 23:56, 8 April 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...

met. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:53, 22 November 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, next to no information at all can be found about the subject of the article...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Not bundling because this one actually has a source, self-referential...

only a couple of passing mentions between them. Fails both WP:NWEB and WP:ORGDEPTH. >SerialNumber54129...speculates 16:32, 28 December 2017 (UTC) Delete--As...

searches, I was unable to find any sources that meet the requirements of WP:ORGDEPTH, therefore school appears to fail WP:NORG. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 16:14...

on a single suburban city council, not properly sourced as passing WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, political parties are not "inherently" notable just because...

discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:39, 2 August 2013 (UTC) Keep - Passes WP:ORGDEPTH. Source examples: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] (Time magazine article reprinted...

than any evidence of third-party coverage that would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not "inherently" notable just because their...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. The...

neither keep nor delete. I do not think the material is sufficient to pass ORGDEPTH but there is an argument to be made for passing GNG. JbhTalk 13:18, 4 June...

- embassies are not inherently notable. They need to pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH like everything else. St★lwart111 03:37, 28 December 2014 (UTC) Relisted...

have nothing but a plethora of press releases & mere announcements. WP:ORGDEPTH isn’t met. The sources used in the article itself corroborates a before...

13:21, 6 September 2018 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:ORGSIG, WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH. No significant coverage outside of the organisation's own website, affiliated...

exhibitions but I am seeing nothing which could go towards meeting WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 08:37, 26 June 2016 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:VERIFYOR and WP:GNG. One primary external link without secondary and...

independent sources that discuss the subject in any depth. Seems to fail WP:ORGDEPTH notability guidelines. - MrX 20:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC) Withdrawn - based...

is a few sentences here and here, but that falls pretty far short of WP:ORGDEPTH. The only other sources are just single-sentence trivial mentions. Barring...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Article about a four month old non profit. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of independent sources. - MrX 22:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC) Note: This...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) A non-notable organization that does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Source searches are only providing passing mentions. North America1000...

listings, press releases, and primary sources. Fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG, and WP:ORGDEPTH. WP:NOTYELLOW.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:52, 31 December 2013 (UTC) NOTE:...

JSTOR · TWL) No evidence of in-depth independent coverage satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...

fails WP:GNG and nothing found that would meet the requirements of WP:ORGDEPTH Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 11:20, 28 June 2021 (UTC) Delete Zero independent...

[6] --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:15, 13 February 2014 (UTC) Keep - Meets WP:ORGDEPTH per several of the sources presented above by User:Arxiloxos, such as [7]...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. Could...

exists; it must be the subject of enough independent coverage to clear WP:ORGDEPTH. Bearcat (talk) 17:58, 1 April 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

or republished press releases of announcements which does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. 331dot (talk) 11:51, 10 November 2015 (UTC) Strong Keep: Multiple secondary...

a successful school. Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 19:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable organization that does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH, as per source searches. North America1000 10:06, 19 June 2018 (UTC) Note:...

10. Tchaliburton (talk) 05:22, 16 August 2014 (UTC) Keep - Passes WP:ORGDEPTH per available sources that cover the organization. NorthAmerica1000 03:32...

Wikipedia article if it could be reliably sourced as clearing WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH, but it's not automatically entitled to keep an unsourced article just...

Unsourced article about a karate club. No evidence of notability. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 12:52, 13 September 2015 (UTC) It is the first article ever about...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. Creator...

comment added by 128.84.125.23 (talk) 18:58, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Keep per WP:ORGDEPTH. There is significant coverage from reliable sources such as Oprah and...

could not find anything beyond the usual database profiles like this; WP:ORGDEPTH not demonstrated Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC) The...

reliable sources are typical news reports; no indication that this passes WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:ORGIND. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC) Note: This...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per source searches, does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Only finding directory listings from various searches. North America1000...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) A non-notable organization that clearly fails WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS 💬 03:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been included...

but they don't really cover the subject in sufficient depth to pass WP:ORGDEPTH. A large part of the article is merely an exhaustive list of product features...

of those sources is an independent and reliable source that provides WP:ORGDEPTH, if any? MarioGom (talk) 07:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC) Some of the sources mentioned...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Article is about a ice cream (sorbetes) vendor and his ice cream cart...

makes no indication of any notability either. Fails WP:NORG on both WP:ORGDEPTH (coverage is trivial) and WP:ORGIND (coverage is almost all self-published...

WP:NCORP specifically as the available sources fail to demonstrate WP:ORGDEPTH. O Fortuna!...Imperatrix mundi. 20:39, 31 December 2016 (UTC) Note: This...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of coverage in reliable sources. - MrX 16:10, 4 December 2016...

discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC) Delete It fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:22, 10 February 2014 (UTC) Delete - no evidence...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Contested PROD [1]. Not enough here to meet WP:NCORP/ORGDEPTH KH-1 (talk) 01:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been included...

reliable sources independent of them. Needless to say there isn’t any WP:ORGDEPTH. A google search predominantly links me to user generated sources which...

injection. Most of the coverage in reliable souces is trivial. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH.- MrX 15:24, 30 September 2015 (UTC) Delete - Fails WP:CORP. It's a small...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Poorly sourced promotional article fails WP:ORGDEPTH. The major in-depth third-party independent coverage is just not there...

discussions. NorthAmerica1000 05:47, 6 January 2015 (UTC) Keep – Meets WP:ORGDEPTH, albeit on the weak side. Source examples include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]...

is about an app used by the National University of Singapore. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:AUD, WP:ORGIND. I cannot see the notability of an application used...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Notability concerns; fails WP:ORGDEPTH. PROD removed by article creator after supposedly adding "independent sources"...

Spider) 21:27, 26 August 2021 (UTC) Delete. Agreed, it does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH as the references are in passing, trivial mentions. I searched for other...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Misses WP:ORGIND and WP:ORGDEPTH Marvellous Spider-Man 11:48, 12 September 2016 (UTC) Note: This debate...

trivial coverage about the school buses but no coverage that satisfies WP:ORGDEPTH. I, therefore, would say that this fails WP:NORG. Please let me know if...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:GNG. Akevsharma (talk) 08:40, 3 July 2022 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Source searches are only providing passing mentions; not finding any significant...

about wp:routine is not applicable. However, Passes WP:ORG specifically WP:ORGDEPTH. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 04:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC) If I spoke Portuguese...

than any evidence of third-party coverage that would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not "inherently" notable just because their...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Created by a single purpose promotional account Legacypac (talk) 17:33...

for 10 years. Any sources I could find were trivial. Fails WP:ORG and WP:ORGDEPTH. JayJayWhat did I do? 21:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

sources discussing it. The church is not notable - it fails notability at WP:ORGDEPTH, and as all the church sources are from its own website fails WP:RS. SheffGruff...

these rises to the substantial coverage of the group itself needed for WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 06:31, 18 August 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

and copy edit (some of which I have begun). The organization passes WP:ORGDEPTH. Source examples include, but are not limited to those listed below. See...

sources. --Rubbish computer 14:32, 27 September 2015 (UTC) Delete - Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available sources. The company may be notable someday if their...

in-depth coverage besides the Kathmandu Post article. Not enough to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. userdude 20:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved as...

information in said sources that would allow for expansion of the article. Fails ORGDEPTH. Draken Bowser (talk) 17:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

exists) does not confer notabilty onto the subject of this article. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 22:53, 21 November 2013 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable primary school. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 16:02, 30 October 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available reliable sources that cover the subject in detail...

12:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:ORGSIG, WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH. The only reference that covers the organisation in detail is the academic...

up anywhere near enough in-depth coverage to meet either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 12:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

TWL) Not enough coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:GNG and fails WP:ORGDEPTH. The only coverage I can find relates to anouncements relating to stock...

Rehse (talk) 12:26, 18 December 2016 (UTC) Delete - not notable; see WP:ORGDEPTH Spiderone 19:26, 19 December 2016 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

September 2017 (UTC) Delete: Per nominator, fails to meet WP:VER and WP:ORGDEPTH.--SamHolt6 (talk) 15:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC) Delete - Fails WP:ORG...

Per WP:BEFORE source searches, this church does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Only finding fleeting passing mentions in reliable sources; no significant...

There appears to be a rough consensus that the subject fails SIGCOV and ORGDEPTH. While the subject has been mentioned frequently none of the pro-keep comments...

inherent notability. Does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. The...

independent, reliable, secondary sources. Sources found do not meet WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGIND and ultimately WP:NORG is not met. Powerful Karma (talk)...

organization. Only sources I can find are trivial and do not meet WP:ORG or WP:ORGDEPTH. JayJayWhat did I do? 00:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion...

consist of a press release and trivial mentions of the company. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 13:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC) Delete not yet notable per WP:CORP, and...

discussions. NORTH AMERICA1000 00:54, 13 February 2015 (UTC) Keep – Meets WP:ORGDEPTH, although to a weakish degree. Source examples include [1], [2], [3], [4]...

and involvement in conferences, which falls under trivial coverage at WP:ORGDEPTH. Searches find more similar announcement-based items about delegation visits...

organization, refs are youtube videos and their own website, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 03:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

Thanks, — Music1201 talk 01:48, 7 May 2016 (UTC) Keep as notable meeting WP:ORGDEPTH through non-trivial coverage in reliable, secondary sources. I have added...

23:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC) Again, these are brief mentions that fail WP:ORGDEPTH and the GNG does not apply to organizations. Organizations require significant...

a brochure for an energy efficiency program. Fails WP:NORG notably WP:ORGDEPTH fails WP:GNG Domdeparis (talk) 17:30, 15 June 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate...

improvement. But searches show very little coverage. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 21:56, 1 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. Powerful Karma (talk) 15:10, 26 May 2021 (UTC)...

12:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC) Delete. An unremarkable business. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH: I couldn't find any coverage beyond passing mentions and promotional reports/press...

Does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as there are no WP:RS that could satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. Found a few database entries and primary sources which dont count. VV...

10:52, 27 June 2015 (UTC) Delete Zoominfo shows they exist, but no WP:ORGDEPTH. As a result, fails WP:GNG and WP:CORP. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:20, 28 June...

up anywhere near enough in-depth coverage to meet either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 12:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

sites (YP, Yelp) and social media. GNews show all local coverage. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. No refs. Promotional tone. GregJackP Boomer! 15:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)...

3 May 2019 (UTC) Delete - does not meet WP:ORGSIG, WP:ORGCRITE or WP:ORGDEPTH - only local mention - has had no "significant or demonstrable effects...

nominated but there are plenty there now. Would seem to pass WP:GNG/WP:ORGDEPTH without too much trouble. Stalwart111 10:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC) Keep:...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH JMHamo (talk) 13:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC) WITHDRAWING MY NOMINATION as...

independent, reliable sources to show it passes WP:GNG, doesn't pass WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:MUSICBIO. Onel5969 TT me 12:45, 24 February 2021 (UTC) Note: This...

and here we are. I must say I agree with the PROD rationale of "fails WP:ORGDEPTH". FWIW I found this mention in the Swiss press (my German is not great...

significant coverage in reliable sources. Non-notable by the standards of WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG or WP:42.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 18:29, 2 May 2016 (UTC) Delete. Fails...

participants, funding, etc., but these don't rise above trivial coverage at WP:ORGDEPTH. Overall, I am not seeing the coverage needed to demonstrate that the subject...

locate WP:RS coverage on the subject of the article for it to pass WP:ORGDEPTH. Orville1974 (talk) 23:27, 21 June 2019 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

2012 (UTC) Delete. No substantial coverage in independent sources. WP:ORGDEPTH. --Ben Ben (talk) 16:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC) Delete This club is not...

providing the depth of coverage about the charity itself needed to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 06:50, 7 September 2017 (UTC) Delete. and I think it could...

than any evidence of third-party coverage that would pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. As always, organizations are not "inherently" notable just because their...

any notable consequence and has no reliable source coverage to clear WP:ORGDEPTH. They ran slates of candidates in two consecutive elections, but managed...

to find any reliable sources that cover the subject in depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 13:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

about changes of office bearers ([1]) but that is insufficient for WP:ORGDEPTH and I am not seeing evidence that this youth wing has attained notability...

to find any reliable sources that cover the subject in detail. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 14:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

real media and books, in sufficient depth and volume to get them over WP:ORGDEPTH. But the "referencing" here is entirely to either the organization's own...

listings, press releases, and primary sources. Fails WP:GNG, WP:ORG, and WP:ORGDEPTH. WP:NOTYELLOW. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:56, 10 January 2014 (UTC) Note:...

formed PAC. I am unable to find a single independent source. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 23:04, 22 May 2017 (UTC) Delete I had just hit the Twinkle button...

inherent notability and does not satisfy WP:NSCHOOLS as no WP:RS satisfying ORGDEPTH was found with a WP:BEFORE. I have cleaned up the advertising cruft. VV...

reliable source coverage. Rather, this would have to pass WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH on the depth and range and volume of coverage they could show in real media...

FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Article about a non-notable company that fails WP:ORGDEPTH. The article's sources are a website with a poor reputation, a unreliable...

no indication of its independent notability. Fails WP:INHERITORG and WP:ORGDEPTH. Richard3120 (talk) 15:59, 4 November 2016 (UTC) The above discussion is...

and a mention in the local paper. Run-of-the-mill group that fails WP:ORGDEPTH. BDD (talk) 22:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

recipient of workplace giving schemes. Enough out there I think to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. AllyD (talk) 06:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

(talk) 08:59, 4 November 2016 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:INHERITORG and WP:ORGDEPTH. I'm not even sure what notability has been inherited, as I don't believe...

elsewhere that would satisfy GNG. Nothing that really meets the bar of WP:ORGDEPTH. Kingofaces43 (talk) 04:38, 18 June 2018 (UTC) The above discussion is...

RAJU(T) 12:23, 26 February 2019 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH. Agree with nominator, this is just a small private label run by John Verity...

22 July 2014 (UTC) Delete - No evidence of notability per WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH.- MrX 01:20, 22 July 2014 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion...

article. Searches turned up zero in-depth sourcing. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 20:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...

times on a law firm organization that fails to meet WP:NORG, invariably WP:ORGDEPTH isn’t met. A before search showed me hits in primary sources, directories...

JSTOR · TWL) Per various source searches, this organization does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG. North America1000 13:09, 25 September 2018 (UTC) Note: This...

department, article is WP:OR, no in-depth coverage anywhere, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 19:59, 30 July 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

"D-League" due to a similarly named basketball competition). Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 10:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has...

Delete - Not able to find anything substantial that can demonstrate WP:ORGDEPTH. Routine coverage is not enough. Fails WP:GNG. Hitro talk 06:26, 18 December...

March 2021 (UTC) Delete - I could not find multiple sources satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH; if a suitable redirect location can be found, then please redirect. If...

Article about a company that made a press release a few weeks ago. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 17:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

reliable sources for establishing the notability of this company per WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 12:26, 23 September 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

from independent, reliable sources to show it passes either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 17:03, 1 March 2022 (UTC) I have done all the formalities...

19 August 2020 (UTC) Delete - as above, fails to meet WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH. Jr8825 • Talk 15:10, 19 August 2020 (UTC) Delete per nomination, can find...

Delete: What mentions I can find don't get this unsourced article past WP:ORGDEPTH. Vrac (talk) 19:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Delete: The article text is a...

2021 (UTC) Delete: sources do not appear to meet the guidelines in WP:ORGDEPTH ~RAM (talk) 03:13, 8 January 2021 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

The RS like Bloomberg and Yahoo Finance only report funding and fail WP:ORGDEPTH. JbhTalk 14:31, 9 October 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

Source searches are providing no coverage in reliable sources; fails WP:ORGDEPTH. North America1000 17:01, 4 October 2015 (UTC) Delete: Seems to have been...

November 2021 (UTC) Delete lacking indepth third party coverage as per WP:ORGDEPTH. LibStar (talk) 23:51, 22 November 2021 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

TWL) Article about an organization, not reliably sourced as passing WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG. The primary notability claim on offer here is that the organization...

WP:ORG, relies on self-published sources & sources failing to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. Cabayi (talk) 10:29, 25 March 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

coverage in reliable sources after several searches; does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH. North America1000 09:01, 19 June 2018 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

Thanks, ~SS49~ {talk} 23:08, 7 March 2019 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:NORG / WP:ORGDEPTH. The section "Expansion" comes across as promotional. --K.e.coffman (talk)...

WikiAviator (talk) 05:07, 19 February 2020 (UTC) Delete does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH PenulisHantu (talk) 14:33, 20 February 2020 (UTC) Delete. Promotional article...

evidence of notability for this particular Freedom Campaign, whether by WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG. (The associated U.S. Campaign for Burma also looks open to similar...

right. Just researching online doesn't seem to draw up any so fails WP:ORGDEPTH Sam-2727 (talk) 02:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC) Although the scholar search...

13:45, 7 September 2018 (UTC) Delete: fails WP:ORGSIG, WP:ORGCRIT and WP:ORGDEPTH. I've been looking at this article for a while and come to the conclusion...

of horses (T) @ 06:44, 6 July 2014 (UTC) Delete. I believe it fails WP:ORGDEPTH; the article states essentially that they sell clothes and bought a rival...

for promotion. Sources seem mostly mentions of projects and so fail WP:ORGDEPTH JbhTalk 15:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved as an...

JSTOR · TWL) The article is an amateur high school astronomy group. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Previous PROD was removed without addressing the issue of notability....

Poorly-sourced article about a recently founded book publisher. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available sources. - MrX 17:15, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Note:...

some coverage exists in External Links, though not sufficient for WP:ORGDEPTH; there is also a paywalled 2018 Daily Telegraph article on "Penrith Museum...

Gene93k (talk) 20:56, 31 December 2015 (UTC) Keep – The topic meets WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:EVENTCRIT. Source examples include, but are not limited to: , ,...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH. On a general Google search I found only social media, sites directly associated...

Delete - like all such organisations, this subject would need to be pass WP:ORGDEPTH / WP:CORPDEPTH to be considered appropriate for inclusion. It doesn't in...

free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Sources found do not meet WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGIND and ultimately WP:NORG is not met. Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Powerful...

find were press releases and promotional coverage such as this. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 19:14, 23 November 2013 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This organization does not appear to meet WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG. Source searches provide quotations from subjects involved in...

June 2019 (UTC) Delete not notable organizations and companies. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. this article should be deleted. -Nahal(T) 10:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC) Delete...

WP:ORGDEPTH. Drchriswilliams (talk) 09:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC) Thanks for finding those things, but I'm not as certain that they meet ORGDEPTH. Most...

award recipients, but a source search suggests that this topic meets WP:ORGDEPTH, albeit possibly weakly. Some source examples include: [1], [2], [3], [4]...

JSTOR · TWL) Not covered independently in reliable sources - fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:ORGIND - but plenty of coverage in press releases WP:PROMO. Not...

images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Promotional article that fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Article has lots of sources that do not establish notability. Sources...

before search links me to mostly user generated sources, needless to say WP:ORGDEPTH is an abysmal failure Celestina007 (talk) 23:35, 26 March 2022 (UTC) Note:...

all of which we do not consider reliable. Needless to say there is no WP:ORGDEPTH. Celestina007 (talk) 17:43, 6 April 2022 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...

links to trademark databases and similar general info that don't meet WP:ORGDEPTH. There are a couple articles that mention the existence of the company...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Does not meet WP:ORGDEPTH, confirmed after several source searches. North America1000 12:20, 29 May...

sources. --Binod Basnet (talk) 13:52, 2 December 2018 (UTC) Delete WP:ORGDEPTH not met (although despite the article claiming it's a non-profit organisation...

am unable to find sources that discuss the subject in depth. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 11:40, 24 September 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

Google searches but didn't. Unless something can be located, fails WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 07:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC) The above discussion is...

NOSPlan and reporting a guest speech. Not enough WP:RS coverage for WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 08:45, 24 November 2018 (UTC) Delete Searches don't...

(UTC) Delete - Due to the lack of coverage required at WP:NCOMPANY and WP:ORGDEPTH, not to mention the article's pointless violation of WP:EXIST and WP:PROMOTION...

Thanks, – bradv🍁 03:21, 1 December 2020 (UTC) Delete: Clearly fails WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:SIGCOV. Hasn't been improved in a long time. Not worth keeping up...

source coverage, in sources independent of itself, to clear WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH. But that's not what the sources here are showing — with the exception...

Szzuk (talk) 22:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC) Delete. Fails WP:NORG and WP:ORGDEPTH. I don't mind if a redirect is subsequently created to Regional Broadband...

searches, including Indian media searches, finding anything better. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 07:35, 29 September 2017 (UTC) The above discussion...

facebook. But yes it is a local human interest story and WP:TOOSOON. Also WP:ORGDEPTH and WP:AUD is not satisfied. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 10:46, 16 October 2016...

from independent, reliable sources to show it passes either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH.Onel5969 TT me 13:53, 21 March 2022 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

Inadequately-sourced article about a newly-opened preschool. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH for lack of available sources. - MrX 14:13, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Note:...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Does not pass WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG. Most (if not all) sources come from Bill Heitman, who is affiliated...

Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC) Appears to fail WP:ORGDEPTH with the only citation of the main product appearing at http://www.developerfusion...

Unsourced article about a business school which may not even exist. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 12:11, 26 September 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

is almost entirely promotional, and the awards are of dubious. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Delete for lack of secondary sources. Could be A7. --Sammy1339 (talk)...

and brief quotes from members of the organisation do not constitute WP:ORGDEPTH; subject therefore fails WP:NORG Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:49, 4 May...

of the reliable sources. Therefore, appearing to fail WP:ORGCRITE & WP:ORGDEPTH. One can argue that the current article is of stub quality and thus significant...

appears to be a commercial trade school and as such, would need to meet WP:ORGDEPTH. It doesn't. John from Idegon (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC) The above...

Guidelines and WP:NCORP. Sources are all passing mentions or quotes so fail WP:ORGDEPTH. JbhTalk 12:15, 22 October 2015 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included...

a non-notable professional association, no coverage anywhere, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 01:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

are almost exclusively press-release-driven (notice the dates). Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. - MrX 20:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC) I fixed many mistakes I made by publishing...

organisation, much less discuss it at any depth, so neither WP:GNG nor WP:ORGDEPTH is met. bonadea contributions talk 14:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC) Note:...

have Wikipedia articles only if they can be shown to clear WP:GNG and WP:ORGDEPTH on their sourcing. And that goes double for student wings of political...

from independent reliable sources to show it passes either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 01:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

Life, these merely accumulate "Examples of trivial coverage" listed in ORGDEPTH. I don't find anything to confer notability. asnac (talk) 09:39, 21 July...

Kudos. But these small number of mentions are not sufficient to meet ORGDEPTH or GNG. Guliolopez (talk) 03:03, 26 December 2021 (UTC) Delete I am unable...

Has not accrued significant (third party) coverage and as such fails WP:ORGDEPTH.--SamHolt6 (talk) 04:37, 17 September 2017 (UTC) Relisted to generate a...

notable. No claim of significance here. Hardly any coverage in RS to pass WP:ORGDEPTH. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 12:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC) Delete Like other commercial...

Dr-Bracket (talk) 23:21, 21 March 2019 (UTC) Delete: does not meet NORG / WP:ORGDEPTH. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:30, 23 March 2019 (UTC) The above discussion is...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Not meeting WP:ORGDEPTH. Advertorial to much extent. The article has been created on mainspace...

is their own website, a few trivial mentions in news search, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 16:32, 13 August 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 02:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:ORGDEPTH due to a lack of in depth coverage.--SamHolt6 (talk) 04:28, 17 September...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:ORGDEPTH. Non-notable local street gang with minimal depth of coverage. Magnolia677...

that embassies are not inherently notable. They are required to meet WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:GNG like everything else and these don't. St★lwart111 05:20, 19 December...

coverage from independent reliable sources to pass either WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 16:22, 25 February 2022 (UTC) Edits in references and removal...

there are a few trivial mentions, but no in-depth coverage, fails WP:ORGDEPTH Kraxler (talk) 16:56, 15 August 2015 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...

the school district. Not finding reliable source coverage to satisfy WP:ORGDEPTH. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 19 March 2013 (UTC) Redirect to school district...

Spiderone's assessment. Searches did not turn up enough to pass WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH. Onel5969 TT me 15:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC) Delete Promotional article...