Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for Paraguayan Studies Antonio Guasch

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. Tone 13:50, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Center for Paraguayan Studies Antonio Guasch

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

fails WP:GNG, promo. Based on passing mentions, plain listings, related websites and dead links. The Banner talk 10:19, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Paraguay-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the article appears to have been created by synthesizing tiny snippets and mentions. Look for example at this reference, which links to a list of reccommended books by CEPAG. This is typical of the quality of the references. At minimum it needs TNT.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 13:11, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, gidonb (talk) 07:05, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kpg jhp jm 17:40, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

delete No evidence of in depth coverage. — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 00:53, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per reasons given by BillHPike. I've tried going through the citations and can't find any notable secondary sources. Pjposullivan (talk) 13:23, 10 October 2018 (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.