Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Communicative assent


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 13:27, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Communicative assent

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Original research. I like strawberry icecream. (talk) 21:29, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Non-notable, runs afoul of WP:NOR.--JayJasper (talk) 06:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - the term is used in the literature. Bearian (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  17:46, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, this concept is not just mentioned, it's documented enormously in a Standard! I've added a few references but really, nom should have looked at the web first. There are also some very heavy books that mention CA and I expect they could go in a Bibliography section too. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:38, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep – The nomination doesn't contain a valid rationale for deletion, per WP:DEL. Original research can be corrected by editing. Also keep per references added to the article by User:Chiswick Chap. Northamerica1000 (talk) 12:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Reversing my earlier position of "delete", per addition of reliable sources to article and establisment of notability.--JayJasper (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2012 (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.