Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wish (charity)

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. Sandstein 09:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wish (charity)[edit]

[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)

Does not appear to meet WP:CORPDEPTH. SITH (talk) 19:27, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DannyS712 (talk) 20:13, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No independent sources. Reywas92^Talk 22:27, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's easy to find more sources such as Psychology, Discourse And Social Practice or Do women need special secure services?. See WP:IMPERFECT and WP:NOTCLEANUP. Andrew D. (talk) 09:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~SS49~ {talk} 00:23, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It does not a bit of a clean-up, however I do think there enough sources for this to remain. Cindlevet (talk) 19:49, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems to be quite well known and its conducting own research. scope_creep^Talk 03:12, 9 March 2019 (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.