Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ConTextos

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. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:26, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ConTextos

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

Fails WP:GNG: BEFORE did not produce significant coverage in demonstrably independent and reliable sources. Sources associated with the organization itself or with Harvard are not independent, and the source relating to the ED doesn't offer significant coverage of the organization. —swpb^T 12:35, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. —swpb^T 12:36, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 04:21, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, searching under the old name (in quotes and being careful to note the organization separate from the phrase)brings up more, and Harvard sources such as these ([1], [2], [3] are assorted journals that though affiliated with Harvard do provide adequate indicia of notability, IMHO. Montanabw^(talk) 03:45, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:05, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 01:37, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I had a hard time finding source on my own (my skills are not over 9000) but the sources provided above from Harvard convince me of notability. d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 12:42, 7 May 2017 (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.