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.
Cavarrone 12:25, 15 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep Really bad speedy call. Meets
WP:N with the sources in the article. (BBC, Wisconsin Public are the best).
Hobit (
talk) 06:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep. Yes, the references are there, as Hobit says, and it's quite a nicely written little article. The reference in
The Advocate for me resonates slightly with the Featured Article on yesterday's Main Page –
From The Doctor to my son Thomas.
Thincat (
talk) 08:55, 8 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete and the source above is still not substantial enough for genuinely convincing this article of both keeping and meaningful improvements, the article itself barely has any claims of significance and none of it amounts to substance, thus notability has not been established.
SwisterTwistertalk 02:49, 10 November 2016 (UTC)reply
@
SwisterTwister: Could you comment on the two sources (in the article) which I mention? Between those 3 sources, I don't see how we aren't well above
WP:N but I'm curious about your thoughts.
Hobit (
talk) 15:41, 14 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep per Hobit. Expand and merge into anything about the Redskins naming controversy.
South Nashua (
talk) 15:21, 11 November 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.
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.
Cavarrone 12:25, 15 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep Really bad speedy call. Meets
WP:N with the sources in the article. (BBC, Wisconsin Public are the best).
Hobit (
talk) 06:07, 8 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep. Yes, the references are there, as Hobit says, and it's quite a nicely written little article. The reference in
The Advocate for me resonates slightly with the Featured Article on yesterday's Main Page –
From The Doctor to my son Thomas.
Thincat (
talk) 08:55, 8 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete and the source above is still not substantial enough for genuinely convincing this article of both keeping and meaningful improvements, the article itself barely has any claims of significance and none of it amounts to substance, thus notability has not been established.
SwisterTwistertalk 02:49, 10 November 2016 (UTC)reply
@
SwisterTwister: Could you comment on the two sources (in the article) which I mention? Between those 3 sources, I don't see how we aren't well above
WP:N but I'm curious about your thoughts.
Hobit (
talk) 15:41, 14 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep per Hobit. Expand and merge into anything about the Redskins naming controversy.
South Nashua (
talk) 15:21, 11 November 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.