Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rho Delta Rho


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 20:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Rho Delta Rho

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

A massive article which nonetheless manages to entirely avoid citing a single source independent of the group, which appears on the face of it ot be a generic fraternity. Guy (Help!) 00:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

how about pages such as Scouts Royale Brotherhood, Alpha Kappa Rho or Tau Gamma Phi with absent citations as such, yet seem to freely exist in the pages of wikipedia? this organization is the same league as theirs Supremo106 (talk) 03:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 04:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you please include some newspaper and/ or magazine articles discussing this institution? That would be very helpful. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 04:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep The statement that, "The organization has been, through the years, misinterpreted as a Fraternity and on several occasions also misidentified as a street gang" suggest notability. The article needs to be referenced and cleaned up. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:28, 20
 * Keep I assume it's a national student club of some sort, but in the absence of any 3rd party evidence I don't know just what. The most a NPOV article could say is that they insist they are not a fraternity. A low quality article--they even put in an external link limited to members only, but there is   the potential for a real article, since the subject appears notable. DGG (talk) 03:24, 21 November 2008 (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.