Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ikeda Center for Peace, Learning, and Dialogue

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.

WP:REFUND applies. Low traffic AfD but such comments as have been made point to 'delete'. Just Chilling (talk) 14:28, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Ikeda Center for Peace, Learning, and Dialogue

[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)

This organization does good work, but per

WP:ROUTINE announcements of events. The books that are already cited in the article are about the organization's general areas of interest, or about works done by some of their associates, but are not about this group themselves. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

The book Global Citizens published by the Oxford University Press, one of the references I used, is an independent book from a variety of scholars from the U.S and U.K. who are not associated with the organizations related to Daisaku Ikeda. The Soka Gakkai is one of the many organizations he is either president of or founder of. The SG is a active supporter of the UN and the Center's work on themes of care for the earth, nonviolence, abolishing war and the Earth Charter seem important enough to appear in Wikipedia.Ltdan43 (talk) 20:14, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I could find some superficial coverage in some scholarly sources here,here and here, as well as two news sources which mention them,[1][2] but no significant coverage, nor of their previous name Boston Center for Research.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 18:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This organization seems to be doing good and important work, but it's the kind of work that would not necessarily r3eceive a lot of press or other coverage - conferences, seminars, etc. A significant institutin should not be deletged from Wikipedia jsut because its significance is subtle.--Daveler16 (talk) 18:17, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Chilling (talk) 00:30, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 01:26, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:08, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:32, 15 July 2019 (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.