The result was keep. Sources have been provided which lead to a rough consensus that this appears sufficiently notable. The article clearly still requires substantial cleanup but appears notable in principle. ~ mazca talk 20:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to be notable. None of the sources establish notability, and I couldn't find anything significant on Google. The article has already been deleted three times (see old AFD). Laurent ( talk) 09:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC) reply
129.187.200.191 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC). reply
The result was keep. Sources have been provided which lead to a rough consensus that this appears sufficiently notable. The article clearly still requires substantial cleanup but appears notable in principle. ~ mazca talk 20:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC) reply
Doesn't appear to be notable. None of the sources establish notability, and I couldn't find anything significant on Google. The article has already been deleted three times (see old AFD). Laurent ( talk) 09:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC) reply
129.187.200.191 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC). reply