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

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
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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Capitalization of "Is"

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

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]