Talk:Global Sanitation Fund
Latest comment: 4 years ago by EMsmile in topic Contested deletion
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Contested deletion edit
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... (it serves to educate readers about a United Nations body that serves the public good. It serves as historical and educational document aimed to raise awareness about sanitation and hygiene.) --WASH advocate (talk) 15:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- Neither is a reason for having a Wikipedia article. Coverage in reliable third-party sources is. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 18:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- A Speedy delete shouldn't be used just because the sources aren't in the article... it should be used if none exist anywhere in the world. We all serve Wiki better by improving existing article when there are 3rd party references available. If there are, fix the article or bring it to the attention of a relevant WikiProject. If there aren't any anywhere in the world... then speedy delete all day long. Assume good faith, please! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Has the user WASH advocate now created a new login as the old login name was blocked? I am happy to see this new page, although I have two comments: It might be better to integrate this content into the page about the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council. And secondly: let's not repeat the same information about lack of sanitation and diseases caused on lots and lots of Wikipedia pages. Rather make it clear that this information is available on the pages about sanitation and open defecation so we can keep it updated and accurate there, rather than on many other pages.EvM-Susana (talk) 21:34, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with EvM-Susana and Megalibrarygirl - the content is best moved to Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council. But the speedy deletion is totally excessive. JMWt (talk) 21:43, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- I am coming back to this after four years. I plan to move this content into the article on Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council. The view rates of this article are really low and a separate article is just not warranted (otherwise it would have been beefed up during the last four years by someone...). EMsmile (talk) 07:48, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with EvM-Susana and Megalibrarygirl - the content is best moved to Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council. But the speedy deletion is totally excessive. JMWt (talk) 21:43, 9 September 2015 (UTC)