Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Businessmen's Educational Fund

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. Barkeep49 (talk) 20:51, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Businessmen's Educational Fund[edit]

Businessmen's Educational Fund (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)

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (organizations) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant English-language coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. And yes, I looked for sources that would describe him in relation to the Nixon issue, and I couldn't find much beyond a few passing mentions here and there, mostly in transcripts (so, WP:PRIMARY). The PROD was removed with no useful rationale despite my explicit request to add one or comment on talk :( Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:08, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:08, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:32, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Business Executives Move for Vietnam Peace as it was part of that organisation. Applicable policies include WP:ATD-M and WP:PRESERVE. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • No referenced content to merge, unfortunately. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:07, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • The nomination says "I looked for sources that would describe him". But this is an organisation. The error arises because this is a cookie-cutter nomination – one of several. When I search for references myself, I have no difficulty finding them. Now that I understand the topic better, my !vote is changing. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:16, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Huh, I guess I did mess up the pronoun. Anyway, thank you for adding references. Now there is content to merge. It does not seem enough to keep it (all we have is that they send a letter and annoyed the government based on few mentions in passing), but the content is worth preserving. I am fine with merge at this point (previously, there was nothing to merge, now there is). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 12:47, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found two things that mention both of these organizations: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1660323/posts?page=15 CDI had emerged from a predecessor called the Businessmen’s Educational Fund, formed in the 1960s by Harold Willens. and https://www.heritage.org/node/22907/print-display Willens, in addition to his affiliation with CDI, has been listed as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Fund for Peace and as a principal leader in the anti-Vietnam war Business Executives Move for Vietnam Peace and in BEM's Businessmen's Educational Fund, all of which have been among significant beneficiaries of Mott's financial largesse. Are there any government websites that have records of when each organization was created and by who? Dream Focus 00:05, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DMySon 03:40, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:08, 28 July 2020 (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.