Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/REPOhistory
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 no consensus. Since WP:RELIST precludes a third relist, this is pretty much the only option available. No prejudice against speedy renomination. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 02:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- REPOhistory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No assertion of notability. Individual members may be notable, but even that is not asserted. --SquidSK (1MC•log) 15:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep 48 Google News Results, many of them are non trivial mentions. Also there are probably some offline sources as well. TheWeakWilled (T * G) 21:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:42, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2009 (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.