Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Senang Hati Foundation (2nd nomination)

Senang Hati Foundation

Non-notable non-profit organization in Bali. Pixelface (talk) 04:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 04:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, It appears to be a relativly well known organization in its region. I found quite a bit of information on it with a quick Google search. -Icewedge (talk) 04:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Other than the typical press release, I couldn't find anything on Google to verify the notability of the organization. That might be attributed to the fact that it's a foreign organization, however.--TBC !?! 05:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — this would appear to be another bad-faith nomination targeting an article I started for the purpose of harassment and retaliation. Recuse. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a good faith nomination. I don't see evidence this foundation is notable or why Wikipedia should have an article about it. --Pixelface (talk) 07:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I doubt that this is a bad faith nomination. Pixelface clearly isn't associated with Senang Hati (impersonator), the vandal, and there are some legitimate quality issues concerning the article.--TBC !?! 08:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Jack, could you or some other editor explain how this article establishes notability or has the potential to show notability? Ursasapien (talk) 07:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ~100 English GHits (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) and another ~150 in Indonesian (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL); no reliable, independent, non-trivial sources among them. cab (talk) 10:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete An appropriate guideline for this article is WP:CORP. And the current six external references plus the official homepage all are not reliable, independent sources - therefore my vote. I'm sure this is a very good cause and they should get any publicity they can - but Wikipedia articles only are there to document any notability they may have once they do have it. I'm not convinced the article couldn't be kept though, just because google can't find coverage doesn't mean none exist. So if any of the editors knows about coverage about it - maybe some off-line Indonesian newspaper articles (not press releases/advertisements or trivial mentions, but by independent journalists) - they should say so. Else the article can be re-created once such sources get available. --Minimaki (talk) 14:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice - no evidence of notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see any sources granting notability. Some smallish mentions, and I might be persuaded if we have more of them, but at the moment I do not believe it has notability. seresin | wasn't he just...? 04:36, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]