Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Villagetech solutions

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. I would have probably relisted this if it hadn't already been relisted, since it's very hard to ascertain consensus from such a low turnout when opinions are divided. Both sides deliver some valid opinions, while both sides also deliver some less valid ones (for example, poor style is not a reason to delete, but then, other stuff existing is not a reason to keep). So, in the end, I simply do not see any consensus here at all. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 07:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Villagetech solutions

Villagetech solutions (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A noble cause, to be sure, but noble ≠ notable. This group is little different than the 1000s of little organizations striving to improve the lot of the 3rd world. nn. Carlossuarez46 03:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, unencyclopedic style. Pavel Vozenilek 00:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Coredesat 06:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per above. Style can be fixed, but I cannot find an inkilng of notability. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 17:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep There are lots of less notable things kept in the wikipedia. Removing this raises the bar too high. Lack of sources for a project in the "3rd world" needs to be evaluated in the assumption that eventually the technology will reach such areas and more information will pour out. For example, pictures of the bridges, satellite vies of the areas, cultural importance of the bridges, etc. Jeff Carr 20:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Article can easily be improved by additional links and categorization to meet notable criteria. Number of references in media will obviously be lower for articles related to 3rd world. Inwind 19:10, 27 October 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.