Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Development Effectiveness Indicator

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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Development Effectiveness Indicator

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Development Effectiveness Indicator (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Conflict of interest, self promotional, unsourced non notable topic. Theroadislong (talk) 14:04, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

• Keep -- this is a real thing and it's discussed in a number of books. See e.g. [1], [2], [3], etc.Central and Adams (talk) 18:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 14:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. — Karnataka ^talk 14:56, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
• Delete - unsourced article, created by someone with an apparent COI. mentions in three books published by the world bank aren't sufficient for WP:GNG. It's possible a merge is appropriate, but I'm not sure where to (and since there's no sourced content, what would be merged?). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 22:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

• Delete - My normal inclination on an under-/unsourced article would be give the authors time to source it, but that ship has sailed. It's been around since 2017, it has no sources, the Talk page is empty, and the content of the article is just bad with no clear way to improve it. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 18:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
• Delete Poorly created article. Can support recreation per WP:TNT. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 17:21, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

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.