Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shikshanirman

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 05:16, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shikshanirman

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

The only references listed are from primary sources, except for one, which is a list of students. I searched for both "Shikshanirman" and "Shiksha Nirman" in Google Web, Google News and Yahoo! News, and I didn't find any secondary notable source. Their own website has a page that should list examples of media coverage and the list is empty. From what I'm observing, it fails WP:GNG and I'm nominating the article for deletion so that a consensus about the notability can be reached. ► LowLevel ^(talk) 11:55, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that ^[1] has been provided mentioning about fundraising program.Iamfighter (talk) 15:14, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Iamfighter: Thanks for the update. The editors who will contribute to this discussion will take in account your update. ► LowLevel ^(talk) 15:39, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

^ fund raising link from newpaper website

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:52, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:52, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:53, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 15:11, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Apparently WP:TOOSOON for this organization. No indication that it is currently notable. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 02:12, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No meaningful hits in secondary source databases ProQuest and Lexis Nexis (same passing mention in both databases when searched with a space). Please ping me if more (non-English and offline) sources show in the future. czar ♔ 05:10, 23 November 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.

[1] und raising link from newpaper website

[1]