Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duthuni Farm and Projects


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 13:37, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Duthuni Farm and Projects

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This seems to be a non-notable farming operation, established last year with two plots of land in a small village. bd2412 T 12:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 12:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 12:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 12:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ceethekreator (talk) 12:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * What is the main reason you want this article to be deleted as I am new in Wikipedia I do not understand what I did wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khuthado tshivhase (talk • contribs) 11:32, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * - the nominator is saying it isn't "notable" - which means that there aren't sufficient sources about the topic that are "in-depth, reliable, independent and secondary (newspapers, books, etc etc)" Nosebagbear (talk) 21:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 09:05, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge  Delete (into Duthuni) - nowhere near notability needed for independent article. That said, there are little bits and pieces of coverage and I don't think it would do any harm to move some (Definitely nowhere near all) into the location's article, given the dearth of any other material there. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:18, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I've added a one line addition (given the lack of any reliable sources to bulk it up). It does no harm to keep in (it's not exactly contentious or, now, advertorial) but any more would be. It's a bit odd as a redirect phrasing, so I'd go for delete.


 * Delete This company does not meet our standard (in this case WP:NCORP) for an article. I am not seeing the tidbits of worth that would promote a merge but if this course is taken it should be, given that the target article is a stub, a single sentence that's shorter than this rather lengthy one. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:35, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there anything I can do or edit to make sure that the article must not be deleted ? User:Khuthado tshivhase
 * You'd need to find a couple of suitable sources (in-depth, secondary, independent and reliable) that discussed the organisation itself (not general fields it works on). Neither Barkeep or myself have been able to find them, but if you do we'll both look at them (either add them to the article and post here, or post them here)


 * Delete since subject does not possess independent notability. Material that is not appropriately sourced is not dumped elsewhere in Wikipedia but deleted. -The Gnome (talk) 09:33, 9 May 2019 (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.