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.
Completely fails
WP:GNG. Only source is the official website (which looks very poor) and there very little coverage in independent sources. The
previous nomination closed as no consensus. According to the talk page, the organisation apparently dissolved in 2009.
Laurdecltalk 01:48, 4 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Strong delete - Completely not notable and unsourced.
Andrew. Z. Colvin •
Talk 03:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete This group seems to have very little coverage in any independent sources. I did find this
brief mention. The one reference in the article (in-line external link I converted) doesn't actually mention this group. Clearly doesn't satisfy
WP:ORG.
Gab4gab (
talk) 17:46, 4 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. I don't believe this is notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia.
Ethanbastalk 23:10, 4 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Transwiki - Transwiki to Wikiversity.
Michael Ten (
talk) 04:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)reply
I don't know about Wikiversity's notability policy, but I doubt they want this either.
121.216.50.239 (
talk) 06:31, 7 February 2017 (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.