Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Distributed Proofreaders Canada


 * 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 MERGE and REDIRECT to Distributed Proofreaders. Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Distributed Proofreaders Canada

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No assertion of notability made. Company just opened this month. Google search only results in finding their website. Advertising. will381796 (talk) 05:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Distributed Proofreaders. Distributed Proofreaders is very notable even if this branch isn't yet. -- A. B. (talk) 13:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Alternately, merge and redirect into Project Gutenberg Canada. -- A. B. (talk) 13:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This is not advertising. While the website only launched this month, it is notable because it will preserve works based on different coypright terms than the primary DP site. I have added some language to that effect. Also, it is a separate site and legal entity from the main DP site; simply redirecting to the Distributed Proofreaders record implies that they are the same. Please do not delete. Thanks. Dylan38 (talk) 14:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletions.  -- A. B. (talk) 13:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletions.  -- A. B. (talk) 13:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Distributed Proofreaders. I cannot find any third-party reliable sources for this yet. If they get enough outside attention to provide enough for a verifiable and WP:NPOV article, then it can be split in the future. Double Blue  (Talk) 15:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Distributed Proofreaders without prejudice to later recreation. I'm sure it will be notable in the future, but I don't think it meets Wikipedia standards for notability today.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with and Redirect to Distributed Proofreaders per User:A. B. — Satori Son 15:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge with and Redirect to Distributed Proofreaders per User:A. B. — Satori Son 15:29, 12 December 2007 (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.