Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evangelical Reformed Church in Portugal

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. Possible merging and/or redirecting can be discussed on the article's talk page. Randykitty (talk) 13:44, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Evangelical Reformed Church in Portugal

Evangelical Reformed Church in Portugal (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)

Deleted in pt.wiki after consensus at pt:Wikipédia:Páginas para eliminar/Igreja Reformada Evangélica em Portugal. The two references aren't sources anyway: first is the pt.wiki deleted page, and second isn't reliable. —Pórokhov ^Порох 04:40, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

talk) 05:20, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

talk) 05:20, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

talk) 05:20, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

• Weak keep -- This is a denomination, though a very small one. The initial redlink can probably be replaced with something else, probably Dutch Reformed Church. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:28, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All denominations are notable? —Pórokhov ^Порох 19:09, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into Protestantism in Portugal, which needs expansion. YBG (talk) 04:23, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But is there a valid content in this page to merge it? I don't think so: one source is a Portuguese Wikipedia deleted (by me), and other isn't reliable.—Pórokhov ^Порох 06:52, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying that the information is inaccurate? If so, then the lack of

WP:RS is not a reason to delete without merging, but rather a reason to merge and try to get better sources. YBG (talk) 07:02, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@YBG: Yes, inaccurate and without reliable sources. A search don't present relevant results.—Pórokhov ^Порох 02:46, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:RS or independent, but to say it is inaccurate means that there is some information that you believe is false. What information do you believe to be false? YBG (talk) 03:34, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

@YBG: I don't know if the content is false, but we can't confirm the truthfulness of facts. Maybe inaccurete is a wrong word, sorry, I'm not a native speaker :P. —Pórokhov ^Порох 03:39, 29 December 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.