Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Display Campaign


 * 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 no consensus. Rlendog (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Display Campaign

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The subject of the article lacks significant coverage in reliable third party sources and fails the notability guidelines. Alpha_Quadrant  (talk)  18:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. "This campaign was established in 2004 and has 336 participating cities/ regions with over 9275 buildings displaying their energy rating", . More sources are needed, but clearly notable article in the important area of energy conservation. Johnfos (talk) 21:58, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * While the participation (9,275 buildings in 336 cities) in the project is fairly substantial, there isn't a significant amount of coverage in reliable third party sources. Until sourcing is found, notability can't be established. Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  22:08, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This article should never have come to AfD. The notability issue should have been discussed on the article Talk page, and a merge done with Energie-Cités, if there was consensus for that. Johnfos (talk) 05:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * One of the primary purposes of Articles for Deletion is to establish whether or not a subject meets the notability guidelines. I fail to see how this nomination is inappropriate. Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  00:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 11:50, 27 March 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.