Talk:Sisterhood Is Global Institute

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Feminism Low‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Capitalization of "Is"[edit]

Note that on the official website for Sisterhood Is Global Institute, they have "Is" capitalized, so it is the same with this article title. — Maile (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because, I was actually try to save this by adding some sourcing. The text is not mine. However, this is a legitimate organization. I actually posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women#Sisterhood_Is_Global_Institute hoping one or more of the members will help out with this. I think Speedy Deletion is a little too swift, even if copyvio is involved. Give it some time, please. --— Maile (talk) 01:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article is obviously not a candidate for deletion but it does require expansion. There seem to be plenty of reliable sources. I'm a bit too busy with other things at the moment to be able to help out immediately but I may come back to it.--Ipigott (talk) 11:44, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]