Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WeProtect

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 keep‎. A more complete deletion nomination could have brought this into the "No consensus" area. One word and an abbreviation isn't a very compelling argument. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:54, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WeProtect

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NORG. Absolutiva (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United Kingdom. Absolutiva (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:59, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Sources from The Guardian and The Independent seem enough to estabilishes WP:NCORP. Svartner (talk) 10:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I've added additional coverage from UNICEF and the World Economic Forum (both WP:RS). Alongside existing sources from The Guardian, The Independent, and a UK government publication, the subject clearly meets WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. HerBauhaus (talk) 10:59, 14 April 2025 (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.