Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All By Students (ABS) Notebooks


 * 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   no consensus. Stifle (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

All By Students (ABS) Notebooks

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:SPAM, WP:ORG. WP:COI issues too RayAYang (talk) 18:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions.   -- RayAYang (talk) 18:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this may actually be notable. It does pass V--the sources are OK for the purpose. And it does not read as spam. DGG (talk) 19:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked before setting this up for AfD. Basically nothing beyond what's on the page -- a single gnews hit, 8 google hits. I marked it as a classic "public relations" type piece, hence the spam. I agree, it's not obvious spam, or a candidate for G12. RayAYang (talk) 23:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note — Creator has removed a coi tag from the article among others. This can be better explained at WP:COIN. MuZemike  ( talk ) 23:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * '"Note"' - I am the creator. I removed all the tags because I thought I had solved the issue by editing the language to make the tone neutral. I had initially just grabbed the language from blogs and articles written about them, but after it was tagged went back with a more discerning eye- sorry about all the confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpie7 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Passes WP:V but misses the mark on WP:N which is more fundamental.Themfromspace (talk) 01:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Keep WP:GNGIf a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be a suitable article topic." The marketing press is of the subject, but the university press is independent of the subject —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.186.108.48 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 7 October 2008 (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.