Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GIRCA

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. no prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 21:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GIRCA

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

No evidence of meeting WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Has been tagge for notability for over six years, unresolved. Boleyn (talk) 17:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A search on the full name of the organisation (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) easily finds more than sufficient sources for notability - however, all of them seem to relate to the eventually unsuccessful court case against IBM mentioned in the article. This suggests that the article either needs to be moved and rewritten (with further sources) to be specifically about the court case or merged to a related article. PWilkinson (talk) 11:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article in the Historical Dictionary of Human Rights is framed as an article on GIRCA. James500 (talk) 18:21, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:41, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In view of the level of coverage the case has received, this article should not be deleted. James500 (talk) 18:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 05:57, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (collogue) @ 20:00, 15 September 2014 (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.