Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philippine Atheists and Agnostics Society


 * 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   no consensus. Black Kite (talk) 10:46, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Philippine Atheists and Agnostics Society

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Fails notability guidelines. Cited sources have nothing to do with the group and are only passing mentions. There is no enough reliable third-party sources to create an article on this one, much less to confirm its notability (if any). Moray An Par (talk) 05:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions.  Lenticel  ( talk ) 06:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Atheism-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - two of the three sources are reliable and have significant mention of atheism in that country. Perhaps a move to Atheism in the Philippines? Bearian (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sources are reliable but do not constitute significant coverage. There is not much material to write about atheism in the Philippines considering the lack of literature on it, and the relative youth (and lack of notability) of the organizations promoting it inside the country. Moray An Par (talk) 11:27, 25 May 2012 (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) 00:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Adequately cited, national coverage, and per Bearian. Anarchangel (talk) 23:20, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep So to summarize, there is no case for WP:RELIABLE now and we're just dealing with a WP:SIGCOV? The Freethinker, ABS-CBN News and International Humanist and Ethical Union is enough for me and should be enough for WP:SIGCOV. --Pereant antiburchius (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - a blog post, a news brief and a statement unconnected with the organization do not make for significant coverage in reliable sources. For us to keep, we need additional evidence of reliable sources having treated the subject in depth. - Biruitorul Talk 14:16, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CLUB. There are not multiple independent, reliable sources covering the group's activity. --Tgeairn (talk) 20:24, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The ABS-CBN news source does not discuss the subject in detail. What's left does not constitute SIGCOV of the society IMO. Pol430   talk to me  22:03, 7 June 2012 (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.