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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Ajpolino (talk) 23:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BeyondGenderAgenda[edit]

[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)

It would appear to me that this is at best a laudable proposal that gained no traction, at worst a marketing ploy. OK, so looking this up, I found this on the Welt (German TV channel) website: "Das ist er offenbar nicht. Diversität wird in deutschen Unternehmen nach wie vor zu wenig gelebt, wie die bundesweite Initiative Beyond Gender Agenda urteil." Even with my rudimentary German, this jumped out at me as pretty obviously promotional, even before I saw www.welt.de/sponsored/ in the URL. Please also see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:L%C3%B6schkandidaten/28._Dezember_2021#BeyondGenderAgenda_(gel%C3%B6scht)

Pete AU aka Shirt58 (talk) 10:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:52, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is neither of the things suggested by the nom. But that's not an argument for keep - I actually think the standard here would be WP:NCORP, which is pretty hard to meet even for pretty notable-as-in-famous institutions. This is a DEI consulting company founded in 2020, so I kind of doubt it. The press section on their website is pretty comprehensive, if anyone wants to go through these sources: [1]. -- asilvering (talk) 06:21, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I guess I should reframe this comment as a weak delete since I think it's pretty unlikely anyone is going to be able to build a keep argument. Have I gone through all of those sources to see if there's independent, significant coverage? No. Do I think anyone else will, and additionally then be able to make a case for keep out of what they find? Well... also no. -- asilvering (talk) 06:29, 28 January 2022 (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.