Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sociedade Brasileira de Céticos e Racionalistas


 * 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. North America1000 01:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Sociedade Brasileira de Céticos e Racionalistas

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article fails to meet WP:GNG, WP:ORGDEPTH or WP:ORGIND. Only mentions online are either self-published by Sabbatini or in articles that he is interviewed (about something else). giso6150 (talk) 02:59, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as searches found nothing better. SwisterTwister   talk  06:13, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:13, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:13, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:13, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CLUB, small org with no significant coverage. Would this fall under WP:A11, I wonder, given that the page author is also the society's putative founder? — Nizolan  (talk) 05:12, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: I wouldn't say so. A11's really for NFT deals, not for outfits determined to exist but where no assertion of notability is made.   Ravenswing   05:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable enough. Daniel Kenneth (talk) 08:48, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - seems like there should be sources on this pointing to notability. DaltonCastle (talk) 01:11, 15 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.