Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afghanistan Public Policy Research Organization

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. Courcelles (talk) 20:05, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan Public Policy Research Organization

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The organization has not been proven to be notable. Brunnaiz (talk) 21:58, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All the referenced links were primary sources. While there are some news articles or books mentioning reports or empolyees from the organization, not much can be found about the organization itself. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 22:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and Afghanistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:47, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The publications themselves qualify for the keeping of this article. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 23:05, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete coverage confirms the organization exists, but nothing that meets WP:SIRS. LibStar (talk) 23:28, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There just isn't enough in-depth coverage of the think tank itself to justify a standalone Wikipedia article, even if WP:NONPROFIT applies and the scope of their activities were national (and arguably international) in scale. That said, is there an alternative to deletion per WP:ATD such that we could salvage at least some mention of the organization and its publications? (We currently don't have a subject-specific notability guidelines for think tanks.) In other words, could we redirect this page to another target (and if so, where)? And/or could we include the organization on a list page somewhere? Cielquiparle (talk) 13:02, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of its founders have their own article, and it doesn't belong to any larger organization. Currently there's no place in the mainspace to redirect this to. Maybe a draft of this can be created and wait for someday when the organization becomes notable. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 03:15, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 19:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 10:00, 22 May 2023 (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.