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. (Non admin closure). —Qst 15:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Prod removed with no reason given. Non notable company, All references are from company website. DPCU 07:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable. Hesperian 11:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please note the debate is not a vote; please make recommendations on the course of action to be taken, sustained by arguments. DPCU 12:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know the debate is not a vote, and I also know that that is a ridiculous shibboleth and at the end of the day it is too a vote, no matter how much we protest. My recommendation on the course of action is "keep", and my argument is "it is notable". Hesperian 12:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is a non-profit organization, not a company. One of the reasons it is notable is that the European Commission commissions it to write reports. I've added sources from the BBC and the European Commission to the article, so it meets WP:N and WP:V. Bláthnaid 12:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Blanthnaid. ffm 00:35, 14 November 2007 (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.