Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wacs lyrical
Appearance
- 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. Sandstein 10:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- Wacs lyrical (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable student newspaper. Contested prod from 2010. - Richfife (talk) 14:27, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 01:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 01:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
- Delete for now as there's barely much here unless this can be mentioned and redirected to the school. SwisterTwister talk 05:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:20, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:20, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - as per nom and SwisterTwister. Nothing to show this is more than a student paper, with no widespread coverage. Onel5969 TT me 20:50, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- 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.