Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tobis Portuguesa


 * 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. (non-admin closure) LlamaAl (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Tobis Portuguesa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

unsourced for years and little to suggest this actually notable beyond its apparent age. Prod removed without explanation Jac 16888  Talk 14:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep via WP:GNG. The organization was apparently the subject of a documentary, that documentary and the organization are discussed here, additional sources that appear reliable and provide arguably in-depth coverage include, , , , ,    --j⚛e deckertalk 16:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per meeting WP:GNG even if only in Portugese. To the nominator, research shows sources to be available, and I offer that notability is dependent upon sources being available, and not upon them being used. Being "unsourced for years" is not a deletion rationale. Notability in and even if only to Portugal and in Portugese is perfectly fine.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep obviously those sources need to be added though. But meets GNG. LenaLeonard (talk) 16:48, 13 February 2013 (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.