Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal Confraternity of Sao Teotonio (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 22:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Royal Confraternity of Sao Teotonio
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The first Afd was closed as no consensus. This was challenged at a deletion review, and the discussion there resulted in a consensus to relist this for deletion. I am personally neutral on the deletion. Aervanath (talk) 12:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: fails WP:ORG as repeated searches have found no significant coverage in reliable third party sources. Further, this is a self-styled order lacking a legitimate fons honorum, as neither its 'Royal Protector', nor its 'Royal Patron' were "a nation's head of state" at any time during this order's existence (nor for that matter was either of them ever a head of state, or even the undisputed claimant to a throne, should it be restored). Additionally, it has been disavowed by the Roman Catholic Diocese of São Tomé and Príncipe (purportedly one of its main beneficiaries, whose former bishop is one of its 'Spiritual Protectors'). HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:ORG I have discovered new information (I didn't know about the earlier AfD). One of the basic sources was Catalogo De Ordenes Extranjeras En Espana, "by Jose Maria de Montells y Galan and Alfredo Escudero y Diaz Madronero, 2007, published by the Academia De Genealogia, Nobleza Y Armas Alfonso XIII en colaboracion con la Sociedad Heráldica Española, Madrid, Kingdom of Spain". It turns out that the Sociedad Heraldica Espanola has no official standing and is a private venture (and part of a network of similar private ventures). see and. The Spanish Heraldry Society was founded in the 1980s-"La Orden se reúne anualmente en el Alcázar de Segovia, España, lugar donde habitualmente se realizan los solemnes actos de investidura de nuevos miembros.   Para su ingreso no se exige prueba de nobleza, aunque la condición de noble puede acriditarse por el pretendiente que la poese, pero sí y de forma muy estricta, se precisa ser persona honobrable y distinguida con méritos suficientes, a juicio de los órganos rectores del orden para integrarse al elenco de la misma. The Order meets annually at the Alcazar de Segovia, Spain, where they usually performed the solemn act of investiture of new members. Your admission does not require proof of nobility, although the condition can acriditarse by the noble suitor that poetry but in a very strict and is honobrable person and needs to be distinguished with sufficient merit, in the opinion of the governing bodies of the order to join the cast of the same" from here. Dougweller (talk) 14:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Obscure, non notable organisation with no third party sources.  Teapot  george Talk  14:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above. Based on the available data, it would appear this organization fails WP:ORG. Stifle (talk) 20:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable, self-styled order.--Yopie 20:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep this entry WP:ORG doesn't seem to concern itself with the nature of an order being self-styled or not. The group is comprised of a number of notable persons including the exiled King of Rwanda and several former state governors.  This bishop in São Tomé not recognizing the group is a strawman arguement.  No where on the groups website do they claim to support him with financial gifts.  See WP:FAILN which specifically addresses articles failing to meet notability standards but that otherwise would or could.  In short WP:FAILN deletion is a last resort.  An expert tag should be put on this page and a request made on the talk page prior to moving for deletion.  Seems irrational to rush for deletion as this has not been attempted.--Norelec (talk) 22:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

— Norelec (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment: (i) "no significant coverage in reliable third party sources" is a direct concern of WP:ORG. (ii) Notability of some members is irrelevant as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. (iii) WP:FAILN explicitly states that deletion is an option for where "sources cannot be found after a good-faith search for them". HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep I admit the difficulty of keeping this spam and BLP magnet clean is a problem, having tried to do it for quite a while now. But its nonofficial  status does not make it unnotable. A few notable people do belong, and their presence gives it some importance. Better that we have a n article than not.I admit that these persistent attempts at aristocratic  survivals in an alien world are and ought to be destined for oblivion, but they are not there yet. DGG (talk) 07:54, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: DGG, please cite which notability guideline suggests that a "few notable people do belong" is sufficient to establish notability, as that argument appears to run directly afoul of WP:NOTINHERITED (see below). Can you point to any relevant guideline that this organisation come even close to meeting? HrafnTalkStalk(P) 10:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per lack of no significant coverage. BBiiis08 (talk) 17:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Non-notable ersatz "order" (and I must join the chorus shouting, Notability is not contagious (i.e., you can't make yourself notable by selling or giving something to somebody notable). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:ORG. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:22, 2 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.