Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DesignInquiry


 * 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   SOFT DELETE. Because of low community involvement in this discussion will treat the nomination as an expired proposed deletion, with the understanding that anyone who contests the deletion may request undeletion for any reason J04n(talk page) 18:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

DesignInquiry

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I've declined a CSD A7 on this, as there is some brief coverage in Eye Magazine here, but I don't think there's enough significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources to sustain a full article. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   11:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable organisation. i also believe it fails WP:42, as pointed out by Ritchie.  B a i l o 26  22:49, 21 February 2013 (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.