Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FTFT!

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. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:47, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FTFT!

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

No demonstration of notability for this organisation. Has been tagged since January with no improvement. Only one of the references is independent and reliable. That is not significant coverage by itself and I can't find much else.The article is confusing and uninformative as to the size, location and activities of the organisation but from the organisation's web page it is clear that it is a small and local group of about 200 people operating in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, not a national or international programme of the worldwide Coptic Orthodox church. DanielRigal (talk) 00:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 00:43, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- This is a bad article. I think it must be the youth work of a (or the) east coast USA Coptic Orthodox diocese. Unfortuantely the website (not an independent source) is rather opaque to non-cogniscenti. Accordingly (with regret) Delete unless greatly improved during the AFD period. As a diocesan programme, it might possibly qualify as notable, but I am dubious. I have litlte idea many mant Copts there are in the area. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:59, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 December 4. Snotbot t • c » 16:45, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, reliable sources are extremely unlikely to be forthcoming. Alessandra Napolitano (talk) 18:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as having insufficient coverage in independent third-party sources. If such sources are integrated into the article, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2011 (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.