Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concordia/discordia


 * 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.  Ty  02:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Concordia/discordia

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

This article cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources given that I am one of the people mentioned in this article and the information is not accurate. Also, subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline and is probably self published by one of the other people mentioned in the article. Lastly, the content not suitable for an encyclopedia given that it's possibly a self promotion tactic, which makes it a soapbox. This nomination is for the page Concordia/discordia, not Discordia. Alrightypewriter123 (talk) 00:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.   — freshacconci  speak to me  02:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as NN, etc, as per nom. Johnbod (talk) 02:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with nom John  .n-  IRL  02:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete appears to be a non-notable art collective that fails WP:ORG.  B figura  (talk) 02:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable.--Berig (talk) 18:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom NN Dreamspy (talk) 21:18, 15 April 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.