Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alpha Tau Omega (Philippines) (2nd nomination)


 * 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   Delete all. Courcelles 00:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Alpha Tau Omega (Philippines)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

No significant coverage indicating notability. Same rationale for the following:

-- Moray An Par (talk) 09:20, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Moray An Par (talk) 09:24, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - No automation used here but maybe even worse — a mass nomination without the slightest indication that WP:BEFORE has been followed. "Same rationale for the following..." doesn't cut it. What are you finding for each specific listing in your research? Has each creating writer been notified? Why is there not a place for the consideration and debate of each nomination, which are "similar" only in the respect that they are fraternities or sororities from the Philippines. We should not be half-assing this, in my opinion. I urge a speedy close of all nominations except for the first-named, about the merit of which I have no opinion at this time. Carrite (talk) 14:17, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I was specifically finding for independent sources, which of course failed. Every major contributor has been informed. Moray An Par (talk) 15:06, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. I've got some Philippines-based fraternities in my watchlist. (Sigma Lambda Phi is the one where I saw this AfD notice.) In my experience with these articles, there is a tendency to mirror the fraternities' official web pages and disregard (whether innocently or flagrantly I'm not sure) Wikipedia guidelines for verifiability and formatting. If the nominator has noticed that pattern in the nominated articles, searched for independent sources and found none, and notified the major contributors, then I'd say the nomination is in good faith and proper. —C.Fred (talk) 21:06, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete all, but it's a weak delete for Rho Delta Rho. All the articles are lacking in independent sources. Many of them could probably be speedy deleted for copying text from their respective fraternities' websites. RDR is probably the one in the best condition, but even it has issues. —C.Fred (talk) 21:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I would like to clarify that being in good or bad condition is out of the question. RDR may be the best written among them but that doesn't mean that it's the least deleteable too. Moray An Par (talk) 03:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:16, 26 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) 01:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Comment Not sure where the bar is on "significant notability", Googling on '"Gamma Phi Omicron" site:ph' gives a couple of mentions in a newspaper and inclusion in a bio of a former member of the Philippine Congress. "Sigma Lambda Phi" also gets one reasonable mention on an edu.ph site.Naraht (talk) 14:34, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Please explain as to how these passing mentions could be considered WP:SIGCOV. Please provide actual sources which can be used to write the articles. "'Significant coverage' means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material." Moray An Par (talk) 09:49, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Second comment (but on a different enough topic to not be combined.... Google News is almost *useless* in regards to groups like this. Check out the Manila Bulletin (which I have for each of these, no real hits) and some of the other newspapers in Manila and if the group is primarily from Mindanao, the Davao city newspaper.Naraht (talk) 15:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 19:47, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete all; Wikipedia is not a web host. I strongly suspect this information is copied over from internal files/webpages of the fraternities in question (at least, I've seen fraternities do that before).  It doesn't belong here.  I could support some sort of list of fraternities active in the Phillipines, although since we don't host lists of external links I'm not quite sure how it could work. --  stillnotelf   is invisible  20:19, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete All Each of these fraternities / Honors Societies are not covered by the kind of sources required by organizations. I agree with the above editors' sentiments that these pages represent using Wikipedia as a webhost and are inappropriate content.  The amount of work and the clarity of a page also doesn't have any bearing on its notability, as noted by Moray An Par. I, Jethrobot drop me a line 07:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. The Proffesor (talk) 15:35, 18 July 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.