Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IFF (Community Development Financial Institution)

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. -- Cirt (talk) 20:56, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IFF (Community Development Financial Institution)[edit]

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

Contested PROD. Non-notable governmental non-profit. Already listed at Community development financial institution with other non-notable organizations. Article is heavily promotional and almost exclusively sourced to organization's web site. Uncle Dick (talk) 18:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a governmental non-profit, which would have been clear if the article was read. That's why the article exists, to teach people about an organization with a lot of interest. As mentioned in the article, IFF is the largest CDFI in the Midwest. Many nonprofits want to find information on it, and wikipedia is an ideal way to do that. People that hear about IFF will want to know more as well. And it is certainly not non-notable; it has won numerous awards and is mentioned in the news on a regular basis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbo7089 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:21, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - With the exception of refs for the awards, all refs are to the corp website. The history section is a bit odd, being written as a listed timeline by year, but more problematic is that it is full of external links that, again, lead to the corp. website. May be something to build on with their role in analyzing public school performance, as this would be the type of thing reported in the news and in state educational records, but, again, the links provided lead to the corp. website. I suggest determining what, if anything, makes this company notable according to wp guidelines, and re-writing the article focusing on those aspects. Otherwise, this currently appears to be a business listing pulled straight from the company's website. The Eskimo (talk) 15:07, 29 September 2010 (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.