Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies

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 no consensus. Sandstein 19:07, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies

[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!

The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

I have concerns this article meets WP:NORG. A source review shows next to nothing for this NGO in English sources; the German name "Wiener Institut für Internationale Wirtschaftsvergleiche" gives more hits but nothing seems relevant for WP:SIGCOV. The article was edited/accepted by one or more editors related to this recent paid-editing scandal. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:09, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:27, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect to Kazimierz Łaski. The creation of this article is very fishy -- a single-purpose editor, highly promotional language in press-release format dumped in all at once, orphan status, and mostly primary sources. Like the nom, I can't find any sign of independent notability. It certainly belongs in AfD. As an alternative to deletion, the economist Łaski seems to have been its guiding light, the organization is already mentioned in his article, and his career provides needed context. --Lockley (talk) 19:04, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep sources for this NGO e.g. Emerging Europe [1], Bloomberg [2], in German e.g.: Wiener Zeitung [3], Der Standard [4], ORF [5], Der Standard [6] ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.95.5.221 (talk) 07:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

  Fail, try again. The sources are not about the institute, they just mention it in passing, quoting it for some soundbite here and there. That does not meet WP:SIGCOV. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:17, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep OECD lists the Institute in its directory of relevant organizations [7], Jacques Delors Institute "Austria also hosts two large economic research institutes, the Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (WIFO) and the Wiener Institut für internationale Wirtschaftsvergleich (WIIW), which has a research programme on European integration." p46 [8], the rather well known World bank reguarly publishes „Western Balkan Labour Market Trends“ together with The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, this is the latest edition: [9] User:RRedlich 14:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bold third relist to analyse the sourcing provided by RRedlich, and to ask for additional input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:55, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep, as it is in the OECD directory and has received other significant coverageJackattack1597 (talk) 21:34, 29 October 2021 (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.