Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shahmerza foundation

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. Potentially could even have been a speedy as notability is not asserted. Spartaz ^Humbug! 23:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shahmerza foundation

Shahmerza foundation (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article lacks any reliable independent sources, and is about an organization that seems to be purely local in scope and seems not to meet the notability criteria. Prod removed by creator without demonstration of notability. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Cites no sources and fails WP:ORG. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 22:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
• KeepI am sorry that its not the greatest thing since sliced bread. I made the Shahmirzadian page (yeah I am from there) and this non-profit has left an indelible mark on the village. It built a school and a hospital there. Furthermore, how on earth can you reference this when its U.S.-based but Iran-oriented? Still looking for the Shahmirzadian Times in English in the States. Frankly, reference are very overrated blogs count for Pete's sake. I am wondering why this is tagged for deletion when so many other pages are not. Your subjective interpretations should not be allowed to govern. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smm650 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia:Verifiability is among the most important policies on Wikipedia. If you cannot verify information, how can you trust it? If Wikipedia can't be trustworthy, then why are we wasting our time writing it? Blogs aren't generally considered acceptable sources, see Wikipedia:Verifiablity#Self-published sources (online and paper). Reliable sources in the local language are acceptable, though those in English are preferred. And as for other articles, well, other things always exist. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 07:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

There I added a reference, not great but its a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smm650 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - I'm sure it's a noble ogranisation, but it lacks reliable sources to establish notability and verifiability -- Whpq (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Its not my fault you cannot read Farsi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smm650 (talk • contribs) 05:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

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.