Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation


 * 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 Speedy Delete by WP:G11 and WP:G12, and deleted a second time by  as WP:A7. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 00:58, 6 January 2018 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional in tone. As written, does not satisfy general notability or corporate notability. Google search finds that there is considerable controversy about this organization. If this article is to be kept, the controversy should be addressed in the article. (Tagging will not be sufficient.)

As written, this article has no independent references. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:31, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 04:13, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 04:13, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 04:15, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 04:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete I removed the unsourced fluff from the article, and it doesn't seem we're left with much to keep. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  06:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep There does seem to be a fair amount of usable material on the web (although smothered by a big fluffy mass of Facebook and Youtube). Careful treatment of controversial reputation has clearly not been attempted by the author so far, so yes, cutting it down to bare bones is presumably the right way to go for now, but overall notability remains IMO. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:07, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:36, 28 December 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   15:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. When, its time to run a copyvio-check: text has been copied from the foundation's About page. The article section "The sanctuary" is a verbatim copy-paste. The History section took me a few minutes to figure out. At first it looks like close paraphrasing of the "Who Are We?" section on the About page. But the broken English suggests it is a machine translation. And sure enough, it is a Google Translation of the section Kezdetek from the article on Hungarian Wikipedia. (I do not speak Hungarian, but judging from the Google Translation of the article on hu.wp it could be a c-v/close paraphrasing case in its own right.) I see nothing worth salvaging in any revision, so revdel and rebuilding the article seems without purpose; I am going to tag it for speedy deletion. I am hatting here below the sources PaleoNeonate provided on the article talk page, if anyone wishes to start a new draft. Sam Sailor 07:52, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Added to Talk:Black Jaguar-White Tiger Foundation in : Some of those may of course be considered unreliable. Considering the sensationalist nature of most, it's possible that the article violates WP:NOTNEWS? — Paleo Neonate  – 00:43, 29 December 2017 (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.