Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fellowship Baptist College


 * 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. The consensus is that there are insufficient reliable independent sources to show the notability of the subject. It is also noted that the tone of the article is promotional.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 13:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Fellowship Baptist College

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No secondary reliable sources to assert notability, and written in a non-neutral style BilCat (talk) 13:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. /wiae  /tlk  14:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. /wiae  /tlk  14:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I was unable to find any RS to support WP:GNG. 'written in a non-neutral style' is a major understatement! Pincrete (talk) 14:46, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Reads like a donation solicitation brochure. Dkendr (talk) 19:59, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nomination and earlier commments. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as a degree-awarding institution per longstanding precedent and consensus. Being badly written is not a valid criterion for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * TNT - As a degree-awarding college, it is notable per Wikipedia guidelines. However, the article tone is so promotional that it's best to either start over, or to reduce the article content to a short stub. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's not what AfD is for. We're here to look at the notability of the subject, not the quality of the article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:19, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * At this point, the article does not have any reliable published sources that show the school even exists, and several editors have been unable to find any to this point. Per GNG, it doesn't belong. - BilCat (talk) 17:58, 18 April 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.