Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cours de Formation Generale pour Adultes Ruraux


 * 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. Non-independent sources and a few passing mentions elsewhere do not establish notability. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 18:04, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Cours de Formation Generale pour Adultes Ruraux

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable organization. Another in the dozens of Jesuit centres stream of articles that are largely based on thin notability and a web of inter-related self-published sources. This one has very poor sourcing. This organization does good work, but Wikipedia is not the place to advertise and promote religious ventures that do not meet the notability rules. Belongs on a its own site. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 23:37, 24 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article deals with a notable developmental work over a long period of time, with sufficient international notice shown in the references.Jzsj (talk) 15:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J bh  Talk  14:50, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:ORG. the sources do not cover the subject in depth and secondly zero gnews hits. LibStar (talk) 01:54, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as I have found nothing better and there's nothing to suggest actual independent notability. SwisterTwister   talk  06:16, 7 June 2016 (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.