European Association of Aerospace Students ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( XfD| restore)

Although some citations in the "history" part is missing most of the article is filled with proper references Burki1907 ( talk) 13:25, 7 February 2011 (UTC) I have been working on this page in the my sandbox page, User:Burki1907/sandbox and I think it is now ready to be undeleted. reply

The sole external link to a non-Euroavia source is the EU's webpage, which reads more like a press release than a legitimate news article. To merit a Wikipedia article of its own, can you show where reliable sources that are independent of the group have in-depth coverage? Primary sources are ok to provide support for basic facts and such, but not for establishing notability. Tarc ( talk) 14:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Are you saying that this article cannot be undeleted? Since you are right about the fact that there are no external pages except for the EUROAVIA and EU's pages, we cannot find any other websites to put in the article as a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burki1907 ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Endorse deletion - totally non-notable, consensus properly followed. -- Orange Mike | Talk 15:42, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply

• Endorse deletion Yes, we are indeed saying that since there are no other sources than that rather promotional page, there cannot be an article. This is the basic rule for inclusion here. DGG ( talk ) 21:20, 9 February 2011 (UTC) reply
• Endorse deletion, as the nominator puts it, "we cannot find any other websites to put in the article as a reference" ...and neither could we, despite relisting the debate for two extra weeks and giving it every possible chance. This fails our basic guildelines on organisations by a very wide margin. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply
• Nice web page. You might want to check out Alternative outlets to recreate deleted articles to find a place to host it. -- Uzma Gamal ( talk) 06:34, 12 February 2011 (UTC) reply

Mylai Tenner ( talk| | history| logs| links| watch) ( restore)

I have write the content with proper reference but my page has deleted, kindly restore it so I can change if there is any mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeesolz ( talk • contribs) 13:55, February 7, 2011

Endorse deletion - totally shameless advertisement without any trace of actual reliable sources. -- Orange Mike | Talk 15:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC) reply

• Endorse deletion A clear G11 as entirely promotional. No reason to rewrite, for there is no apparent notability either--a "famous author" whose books are not included in WorldCat. On the other hand there is a listing in Gale's Contemporary Black Biography. Gale is a respected reference publisher. That this should be included is cause not for inclusion of the article, but doubt about the reliability as a source. DGG ( talk ) 21:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC) reply
• Endorse shameless advertisement even including phrases like "For other titles please visit his website" and then a URL. Pretty clearly an attempt at promotion. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC) reply