Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Animal Charity Evaluators (2nd nomination)
Meets  with discussion in Givewell 2013, Wrenn 2015 and Garrett 2018. If you want more sources, someone listed a bunch at Talk:Animal Charity Evaluators#Notability tag. There was indeed quite a bit of  which I just deleted. As per -CONTENT, problems like puffery aren't usually deletion reasons: {{tq|If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page.}} I wasn't sure about removing their charity recommendations. After all, they are a rating organisation, so it seems potentially relevant to say what their ratings are. What was your reasoning, {{u|DGG
— User:Trimton, 01:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:PUFFERY||WP:DEL (Wikipedia:Notability)