Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amareway


 * 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. Olaf Davis (talk) 00:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Amareway

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

An holistic approach to life. Although a number of references are given, I am dubious about whether any of them counts as a reliable source. &mdash; RHaworth 21:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research that uses so many words to say so little: Being aware is the process which turns our lives and improves them. It is not a one-time task, it is a life-long exploration. It can start in different ways, from different reasons. Being aware starts with understanding that, while the past made us what we are today, and the future may give us the time to put our skills at the service of our beloved ones, the present is the only tense which really counts, and here the only place where we are. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:37, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, valuable contribution with no commercial goals. References are provided, style is Wiki-friendly, copy is clean. No reason to remove it. - 11:40, 13 March 2010 (PST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.6.4.49 (talk)  — 174.6.4.49 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete Non-notable. No matter how valuable and non-commercial the organization, no matter how clean the style, this topic fails the WP:N notability test. There is zero coverage of this term or movement by independent WP:RS reliable sources, either in the article or on Google. --MelanieN (talk) 21:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of evident notability. If coverage comes along later, or if the subject becomes more notable (or more widely known) over time, then an article might be appropriate - and we can revisit it, if and when. But we don't have the third-party coverage to justify an article at the moment. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:23, 16 March 2010 (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.