Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gran Priorato Rectificado de Hispania

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. Black Kite (talk) 09:45, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gran Priorato Rectificado de Hispania[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet GNG; its only source is WP:SPS (the org's website). This is a body of the Rectified Scottish Rite, and it doesn't cover "Spanish speaking countries" as stated in the article, it covers "Hispania" (hence the name). Assuming 1778 is correct for founding, it has chartered 9 lodges (numerically) and only has six at present, two of which were chartered within the last two years (according to the website). Its eswp article (where I would expect to find more info) has no other sources, and a Google search also turns up no other sources. MSJapan (talk) 21:46, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mild Keep It's got pages in both the Spanish and Catalan Wikipedia which indicate (although certainly do not prove) notability. However as Christian Freemasons they're probably about as common as land based fish. JASpencer (talk) 22:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I looked at that, just in case, and that creates a bigger problem. The Catalan and Spanish articles are about a different group with a different website. Enwiki EL is going to Gran Priorato de Hispania and the ELs in Spanish and Catalan go to Gran Priorat Rectificat d'Hispània, which is a Spanish site that says Gran Priorato Rectificado De Hispania. I've adjusted the interwiki so those link to each other and not here, but the "Rectificado" makes a big difference; it was only formed in 2010, and apparently what they both are is signatory to a document dated 1778 which has nothing to do with their respective founding dates. MSJapan (talk) 22:57, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't think the Spanish and Catalan articles indicate notability, given that they are completely without references. -- 203.171.196.14 (talk) 14:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:41, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable; nothing in Google Books, Google News, or Google Scholar. MSJapan has discovered this organisation was only founded in 2010; this makes the lack of notability unsurprising. -- 203.171.196.14 (talk) 14:43, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: A clear case for deletion has been made and I concur that this is a non-notable organisation. Jezhotwells (talk) 07:38, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- The first thing we should have is an article on Freemasonry in Spain, before we can have articles on individual branches. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.