Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B&C

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Paul August &#9742; 04:17, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

B&C
Article fails to explain subject's notability. Zoe 07:19, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree. --Daveb 07:23, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, it's secret enough to not have any verifiable sources on the net about it. . - Mgm|(talk) 08:33, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, too secret. Proto t c 10:29, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Keep it secret. Alf 13:05, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. Dottore So 16:37, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as unverifiable unless good, verifiable evidence presented prior to expiration of VfD. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:56, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not notable - T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  21:01, 29 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.