This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article should not be speedy deleted as being about a person, animal, organization or web content but which fails to assert the importance of its subject, because...
The references are solid; there's nothing specifically disputed by the contributer who has marked it for deletion, and the topic is certainly of sufficient significance to warrant a page - particularly as a future PM was closely involved, and the group became more widely known.
Marty jar (
talk) 12:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
There is no deletion tag given on the article. Is it up for deletion? Span (
talk) 12:51, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
It was listed around a month ago, and I’m sure it was down as potentially being for deletion earlier this morning…I could have been mistaken though! Anyway – it seems to be an article which would be well supported.
Marty jar (
talk) 15:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
I declined an A7 speedy on this article about a month ago; as far as I can see, it hasn't been edited since, so it probably wasn't up for deletion today.
A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (
talk) 15:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article should not be speedy deleted as being about a person, animal, organization or web content but which fails to assert the importance of its subject, because...
The references are solid; there's nothing specifically disputed by the contributer who has marked it for deletion, and the topic is certainly of sufficient significance to warrant a page - particularly as a future PM was closely involved, and the group became more widely known.
Marty jar (
talk) 12:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
There is no deletion tag given on the article. Is it up for deletion? Span (
talk) 12:51, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
It was listed around a month ago, and I’m sure it was down as potentially being for deletion earlier this morning…I could have been mistaken though! Anyway – it seems to be an article which would be well supported.
Marty jar (
talk) 15:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
I declined an A7 speedy on this article about a month ago; as far as I can see, it hasn't been edited since, so it probably wasn't up for deletion today.
A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (
talk) 15:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)reply
.svg){kind=small}