Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LRRC24

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 keep, noting that the addition of references and categories to the article has weakened the nominator's argument. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LRRC24

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

Without references and categories, not meet the CSD criteria, so nominate for discussing. 333 -blue 07:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Entrez Gene has an entry here. I've also changed the AfD classification so that it is listed under "science" based AfD discussions.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:20, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 12:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: it seems that human genes and proteins, even those poorly characterized, have automatic notability; I don't see how this one is any different. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 16:17, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or at best Draft and userfy if not yet immediately improvable as this is certainly an encyclopedia-material article. SwisterTwister talk 04:55, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Since no one had added the NCBI, I added it along with a genecards.org reference which had some human language in it. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 21:07, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The author of the article updated the article quite a bit and added an image. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 15:50, 29 February 2016 (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.