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 no consensus. Kurykh (talk) 02:11, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sentro ng Wikang Filipino[edit]

Sentro ng Wikang Filipino (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)

References consist only of sources lacking independence. Subject would need evidence of coverage in independent reliable secondary sources in any language to be retained. KDS4444 (talk) 14:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Included independent sources. I hope that this will get considered. SWF is a nationally-recognized research and publishing arm in the Philippines. In fact it is a National Book Awards awardee as Publisher of the Year. Isko1901 (talk) 10:40, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The problem with both of the references that are used for what looks like could be a significant award either lack independence or are primary sources. Citing the web page of the organization that gives out the awards as evidence of notability is not evidence of notability-- what would count towards notability is if a newspaper (a national one) carried an article about the publishing house receiving the award from the critics circle and discussed the publishing house in the course of its coverage. That is called an independent secondary source! That is what this article needs in order to be retained. Getting an award is great, but we need to know that the award really matters before we can use it to get a sense of notability of the recipient. Can you find such sources? KDS4444 (talk) 11:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:41, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:41, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:41, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to University of the Philippines Diliman - This is weird, I could have sworn the organization received more coverage in sources, as I occassionally hear about it in the news. But the only source I could find specifically about it is a video report by GMA News, which doesn't really seem to be enough to establish notability. However, a redirect to its parent organization shouldn't hurt as it is a possible search term and it could have a mention in the aforementioned article (full disclosure: I am currently a student of the University of the Philippines Manila, but this does not affect my opinion of the article subject's notability). Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 08:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:41, 23 January 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.