Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Filantrópica


 * 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. No, actually we don't continue to relist. Twice is enough. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:11, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

A Filantrópica

 * – ( View AfD View log )

There is no evidence that A Filantrópica is a notable organisation. The organisation doesn't have any clear national or international notice nor are there sufficient independent sources to suggest that it is notable. --Mrmatiko (talk) 10:01, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions.  —Mrmatiko (talk) 10:18, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * How can you say there are no sufficient independent sources to suggest that it is notable? the article is half built and there are already 3 sources! One being a book, another the city hall and another the city library. This has nothing to do with google hits, that say nothing about subjects like this. --PedroPVZ (talk) 22:41, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:22, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - TP 02:47, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * will you continue to relist? The article is having hundreds of hits, but people dont reply because they don't know about the subject. this all issue started because someone thought it was a common company, because I wrote it was an "arts company", i was lost in translation... And people keep thinking it is a company, but it is not, it is privately run by it is a public service. there are several links, reliable refs, etc. this entry should be closed. --Pedro (talk) 10:22, 26 June 2011 (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.