Mannkal Economic Education Foundation: Only passing mentions in most sources which are independent from the subject.  Tar nis hed Path talk 10:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics , Business , Education ,  and Australia .  Tar nis hed Path talk 10:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete - as far as I can find, the information I can find about this from independent reliable sources is insufficient for an article.  Three of the four refs on the page are from the company's website.  this seems to mention the company and its founder, and I guess you could use this , although I'm not too sure it's that reliable.  Apart from that, I can't find much more.  JacobTheRox ( talk ) 11:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Mainstream news outlets have discussed the organization and their events and activities many times over the years: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/liberals-in-denial-on-terror-and-should-be-destroyed-says-think-tank-boss/news-story/b483f845b88ab401edc60176d8137583 https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/companies/why-gold-always-glitters-for-mining-legend-ron-manners/news-story/d15e178d5515b8b5de3b39bfc70a51f1 https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/03/senator-jacinta-nampijinpa-price-speaks-at-the-mannkal-foundations-emerging-leaders-event/ https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/01/former-liberal-mp-john-hyde-awarded-oam/ https://www.businessnews.com.au/article/Business-leaders-in-Queen-s-Birthday-Honours https://www.businessnews.com.au/article/Manners-made-for-mining https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/rebranding-the-mining-industry-20111114-1nfef.html Lukemcgr ( talk ) 16:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Spectator is not WP:GREL per WP:SPECTATOR , It's articles are primarily opinion pieces and should be judged accordingly.  The WA Today story mentions Mannkal once, a long way from SIGCOV.  I can't access The Australian articles so I can't make a judgment, however given both headlines I'd be surprised if there was SIGCOV of Mannkal in and of itself.  The two Business News articles have more than passing mentions, however smack heavily of paid PR content.  Tar nis hed Path talk 22:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I've had this on my radar since just before the most recent relist... should probably commit to getting it done today so I don't forget it again.  Haven't finished my review of the sources yet, but I just wanted to note that these specific articles in The Australian are available in The Wikipedia Library's subscription of ProQuest (under different titles) for anyone interested.  "Liberals in denial" is 1905750740 ( TWL EZproxy link ), "Mining legend" is 2834330126 .  Another article in The Australian is "No campaign stands by Gary Johns amid controversy"  ( 2841623161 ), but that is also a name check, we can use it to verify that they  a)  have a Christmas party and  b)  people speak at it but that's pretty much it.  As another way to access, I think most The Australian articles also let you skip the paywall if you access as a google AMP .  Anyway, should hopefully be done with the rest of the sources in my list soon.  Alpha3031  ( t • c )  12:10, 24 April 2024  (UTC)  [ reply ] While my search is not entirely exhaustive, I believe we can exclude with high confidence that there exists any coverage satisfying WP:ORGDEPTH .  I would honestly disagree that even the two Business News articles go anywhere beyond what is solidly WP:ORGTRIV  (of Mannkal, rather than the founder Manners)  "Queen's Birthday" has approximately two facts about the organisation, and precisely zero analysis; "Manners made for mining" is the same.  The other articles in Business News are largely "here is what they said" "here's one of them writing a column for us this week" etc.  Surely very interesting, but not something we can write an article about the org from.  There are two books that have brief mentions, Ferguson's 2012 Gina Rinehart , ISBN 9783031270444 , says: Gina has forged links with some of the most aggressive free-market think tanks in Australia and overseas.  These have included the Institute of Public Affairs, the Mont Pelerin Society, the Mannkal Economic Education Foundation and the Atlas Economic Research Foundation.  Manners has been appointed to the Board of Overseers for the Atlas Economic Research Foundation which is associated with neoliberal think tanks in 80 countries.  and Hagland's 2023 Think Tanks in Australia: Policy Contributions and Influence , ISBN 9783031270444 also mentions Mannkal, twice in footnotes, once in body text quoting their executive director and also in the index and appendices containing list of think tanks.  I think Hagland's book is quite interesting, and could be useful in a more general article (on, you know, think tanks in Australia in general), but ultimately, again, there is almost nothing to write about this org itself.  On the two Spectator articles, the first one, about Senator Price is written by, uh, Ron Manners.  The founder and chair.  So, not independent.  Not that it even really says anything about the org.  The other one is a reprint of their presser .  As far as I can tell, none of the other score of articles that have a keyword match for Mannkal have anything to say either, most of them are just "this was written by Mannkal scholar/chairman/alumni".  I do not see how we could possibly write any article based on what is published in independent, reliable secondary sources, and in this case, that mean we most likely shouldn't.  Delete .  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 13:28, 24 April 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete