Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiptree sneeze

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 delete. postdlf (talk) 18:43, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tiptree sneeze

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Just as not every fart is notable, not every sneeze is notable. Delete for being a WP:ONEEVENT, all sources published in March 2014. Otterathome (talk) 22:32, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No enduring significance.TheBlueCanoe 17:32, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- meets WP:GNG. Not all sources were published in the same month. I am currently working on adding them.Qxukhgiels (talk) 22:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but willing to be convinced otherwise -- especially if someone actually writes it into a score. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:01, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; news-cycle and fluff coverage only, not notable or encyclopedic. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:28, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTNEWS as/and others above. — Ched : ? 16:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - "The event gained national attention" - Well unless I've been living under a cage for the past year then this is complete bs!, Anyway nothing of value here so get rid. –Davey2010^Talk 03:26, 5 February 2015 (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.