Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demographic surveillance system


 * 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)  J 947 ( c ) (m)   20:17, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Demographic surveillance system

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

How does this pass GNG? Very few hits across journals et al.A redirect target may be sought after. Winged Blades of Godric On leave 04:55, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Mark the trainDiscuss 05:31, 29 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Not sure why this is even a separate article. Does not have any notability by itself. Adamgerber80 (talk) 12:28, 29 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep I have rewritten and expanded the article to include several paragraphs backed by 10 reliable sources, all secondary for the basic facts they support. DSS are an important part of public health monitoring in developing countries. The multiple RS in the article, including two books, show notability per WP:GNG. --Mark viking (talk) 22:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep At presentthe article seems satisfactory; enough references to show notability. I'd be surprised otherwise .as I thought it was a well known concept.  DGG ( talk ) 04:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:04, 6 October 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:44, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The new version (thanks MV) seems to be well defined and notable. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:26, 16 October 2017 (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.