Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FISEC
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 redirect to European Federation of Food Science and Technology. Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:11, 6 July 2026 (UTC)
FISEC
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- FISEC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Doing a cursory search on the internet, this appears to lack any form of significance that would qualify it under the WP:GNG. Additionally, this article merely covers a timeline and the group objectives, failing to show any notability throughout. A person of sorts (talk) 02:33, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related AfD discussions. A person of sorts (talk) 02:33, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Organizations, Education, and Science. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 07:40, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related AfD discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 07:40, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Delete I found a 1992 paper, but since that has zero cites it indicates minimal to no attention by the community. Hence a very clear delete. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:43, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
- Redirect to European Federation of Food Science and Technology. FISEC was that federation's student council, so the title is a plausible search term. The 1992 source above is a short item in Food Control of uncertain independence, not significant independent coverage, and nothing else found meets WP:NORG. A short sourced line at the target would help, so the redirect points to content that actually names it. EmilyR34 (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2026 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More supports for the redirect....?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 15:34, 28 June 2026 (UTC)
- I also would support a redirect, considering if it's a possible connection I would see it as reasonable.A person of sorts (talk) 16:33, 29 June 2026 (UTC)
- 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.