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.
This article has been through AfD before. The previous discussion concluded that the subject is not notable, nothing has changed since then. Still fails
WP:NACTOR and
WP:GNG. My opinion is still that it should be deleted.
Coderzombie (
talk)
10:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment I did initially close this as speedied by an admin, however their rationale didn't particularly add up; the article was deleted under G4 criteria, however the article was not deleted at AfD, the last entry asked it to be draftified. Also noting this draft is also up for deletion
here. Thanks
Nightfury12:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Previous AfD was Draftify only because there was a possibility of improving notability, but that has not changed in a year and unlikely to change in upcoming time as well, hence I support delete.
Coderzombie (
talk)
15:59, 29 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Polite request for closing admin - please investigate as to whether the G4 rationale supplied would be appropriate in this case - when I contacted Materialscientist they did acknowledge they may have made a mistake and happy for reversion, but alas I am not an admin, so cannot do such an action. I would like to also kindly ask for non-admin closers to refrain from closing, if possible, please.
Nightfury21:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Recreation notification - I reviewed the reasoning here and on the CSD log, and decided that recreation made sense, both as a not-strictly a deletion and also that in such a borderline case, its recreation would also aid the AfD.
Nosebagbear (
talk)
13:44, 3 November 2020 (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.
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.
This article has been through AfD before. The previous discussion concluded that the subject is not notable, nothing has changed since then. Still fails
WP:NACTOR and
WP:GNG. My opinion is still that it should be deleted.
Coderzombie (
talk)
10:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment I did initially close this as speedied by an admin, however their rationale didn't particularly add up; the article was deleted under G4 criteria, however the article was not deleted at AfD, the last entry asked it to be draftified. Also noting this draft is also up for deletion
here. Thanks
Nightfury12:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Previous AfD was Draftify only because there was a possibility of improving notability, but that has not changed in a year and unlikely to change in upcoming time as well, hence I support delete.
Coderzombie (
talk)
15:59, 29 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Polite request for closing admin - please investigate as to whether the G4 rationale supplied would be appropriate in this case - when I contacted Materialscientist they did acknowledge they may have made a mistake and happy for reversion, but alas I am not an admin, so cannot do such an action. I would like to also kindly ask for non-admin closers to refrain from closing, if possible, please.
Nightfury21:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Recreation notification - I reviewed the reasoning here and on the CSD log, and decided that recreation made sense, both as a not-strictly a deletion and also that in such a borderline case, its recreation would also aid the AfD.
Nosebagbear (
talk)
13:44, 3 November 2020 (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.