Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libertad (Philip Morris front)

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 merge to Philip Morris International#Controversies. (non-admin closure) ~ Winged Blades^Godric 01:50, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Libertad (Philip Morris front)

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

A non-notable organisation that doesn't meet WP:CORPDEPTH. No coverage in significant reliable sources, with the only substantial coverage on the company being from wiki site SourceWatch which seems to source it's content from primary tobacco industry documents. No content worth saving, and the title would not be a plausible redirect. Kb.au (talk) 23:01, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Kb.au (talk) 23:03, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:37, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:09, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any chance of a Merge with Philip Morris? There's not a lot there, but perhaps a sourced sentence could be added to that page. SportingFlyer (talk) 17:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or keep. Merge the article into the Phillip Morris article's Controversy section unless someone can find enough info on Libertad to merit keeping it. The information we already have is significant and should be kept on Wikipedia somehow. Centibyte ^(talk) 18:05, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. There's no independent value. If it is because of Philip Morris and therefore should belong to Philip Morris's article. Acnetj (talk) 21:38, 17 February 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.