Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman Catholic Diocese of San Isidro


 * 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The result was   keep or "nomination withdrawn", take your pick (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Diocese of San Isidro

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

There's not even one sentence in this article (current version or history). Content is two red links and an external link. ike9898 (talk) 13:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep All such dioceses are notable. There will always be material to be found--at the very least, the successive bishops, and generally the schools. DGG (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  16:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - There is nothing of any weight to this article. And I don't see how EVERY Diocese is notable. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 17:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Dioceses are notable as an important administrative division of the Roman Catholic Church, one of the largest and most powerful organisations in the world. To members of the church in these areas they are as important as top-level local government divisions, which we also consider notable.  Lack of content is not grounds for deletion; the article is simply a stub.  There is plenty of content that can be added quite easily, including geographical information about the diocese, historical information (when was it founded; have its boundaries been changed since then?) and information on any notable bishops who have served there. JulesH (talk) 21:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Nominator comment: This article isn't a stub, it's nothing. If someone wants to start an article that's fine, but there's not even one sentence.  ike9898 (talk) 21:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - I just made it a stub (two sentences!). If anyone wants to expand some more, there is more information available from the source in the article. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  04:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as per JuelsH. Edward321 (talk) 03:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, article is a stub with references that can be expanded. I created the article with the sources so that people could expand it later on. Benkenobi18 (talk) 23:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Original nominator comment: Page has been turned into a legitimate stub. I vote keep. ike9898 (talk) 13:34, 21 April 2009 (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.