Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World of Good

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:05, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

World of Good[edit]

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

Procedural nomination. I've declined a {{prod}} on this as the article has existed for over a decade and multiple editors have worked on it implying that they at least implicitly consider it worth keeping. However, I'm having difficulty finding any significant coverage outside press releases. (Because the name is a common phrase, an online search is a needle-in-a-haystack exercise; the sources may be out there and just buried under false positives.) ‑ Iridescent 18:07, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Yes the name makes it challenging but after some digging I've found articles in Forbes and SFGate (SF Chronicle's sister web site), as well as in Time Magazine, though that's paywalled so I can't cite anything yet. (link: [1]). Searching on the founder, Priya Haji, also helps return some good sources, though often only tangentially covering this company. I'll keep digging as I have time, but I think the coverage is out there. Crow^Caw 17:17, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- an unremarkable private company / subsidiary. I had looked for sources before I PRODed the article, and I was only finding routine announcements or PR-driven coverage. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:37, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:22, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:46, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No coverage in reliable sources. The sources provided by Crow are press releases and do not establish notability. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:37, 20 June 2017 (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.