Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World-Wide Baraca and Philathea Union, Incorporated

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Clear consensus to Keep, even after re-list, that was not refuted. (non-admin closure) Britishfinance (talk) 22:41, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

World-Wide Baraca and Philathea Union, Incorporated[edit]

World-Wide Baraca and Philathea Union, Incorporated (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, fails GNG. HighKing++ 16:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC) HighKing++ 16:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:33, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:33, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:33, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possible keep -- The main source is an encyclopedia, presumably a RS. It may have been significant a century ago, but is clearly now defunct, which archives deposited with a Seminary (which presumably considers the archive significant). With a defunct organisation, whose heyday was probably 70-120 years ago, the lack of mentions on the Internet is unsurprising. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:59, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia. If other published encyclopedias (including old ones and specialty ones) covered a topic, wikipedia should to.4meter4 (talk) 03:39, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:39, 29 October 2019 (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.